Jump to content
Rose of Red Lake

Dany and child murder

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Yes she came to Astapor to seriously consider the purchase of slaves.  The Unsullied do not rape, steal, nor sack conquered cities.  That was one factor in their favor and what made them attractive.  An intelligent young woman comes to Astapor and her eyes are opened to the suffering of these slave soldiers.  It became a rescue mission.  

A rescue mission? The majority of the drama and internal monologue in those chapters is about Jorah kissing her, how to win Westeros, and the dilemma of buying slaves, not how they need to be freed or how to help them transition out of slavery. Barristan warns that if she stays, her “heart will turn to brick,” with bricks representing an empire built on blood and cruelty. Arguably these chapters set her on the road toward losing her humanity because Catelyn had similar line that foreshadowed Stoneheart.

The Unsullied have to have some irony, something like Dany ends up killing children anyway because Westeros sees her as a slaver because she brought them there. A tidy war is very charmed.

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Let us get back to your earlier question to me.  It was never murder.  Murder is a legal term.  There was nothing illegal here unless you consider all wars illegal.  

 Well, I’m not using the phrase you used, “child sacrifice” because that’s just creepy.

59 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

She is a khaleesi, heir to the lands of Westeros, and arguably monarch of the lands once belonging to the Valyrians.  She has the authority to judge.  

There’s no authority here, she just took what she wanted. She acted like the khals who hang around threatening to attack. “What would Viserys and Rhaegar do?” is discussed but in taking the city she isn’t like either. She’s now more like her husband. 

Another contradiction that suggests things aren’t as simple as “liberation!!!” is that Irri is pleasuring her as a bed slave while she is considering the trade. Dany knows that Irri is acting in that role because she has to remind her that she freed her, but Irri is just doing the same thing she always did. She robotically repeats that it “is an honor to please you.” Irri is not truly free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

A rescue mission? The majority of the drama and internal monologue in those chapters is about Jorah kissing her, how to win Westeros, and the dilemma of buying slaves, not how they need to be freed or how to help them transition out of slavery. Barristan warns that if she stays, her “heart will turn to brick,” with bricks representing an empire built on blood and cruelty. Arguably these chapters set her on the road toward losing her humanity because Catelyn had similar line that foreshadowed Stoneheart.

The Unsullied have to have some irony, something like Dany ends up killing children anyway because Westeros sees her as a slaver because she brought them there. A tidy war is very charmed.

 Well, I’m not using the phrase you used, “child sacrifice” because that’s just creepy.

There’s no authority here, she just took what she wanted. She acted like the khals who hang around threatening to attack. “What would Viserys and Rhaegar do?” is discussed but in taking the city she isn’t like either. She’s now more like her husband. 

Another contradiction that suggests things aren’t as simple as “liberation!!!” is that Irri is pleasuring her as a bed slave while she is considering the trade. Dany knows that Irri is acting in that role because she has to remind her that she freed her, but Irri is just doing the same thing she always did. She robotically repeats that it “is an honor to please you.” Irri is not truly free.

Irri is a volunteer.

i think it's plain from the chapters that Dany was disgusted by the treatment of slaves at Astapor.  What she did that day was righteous.  What she ought to criticised for is leaving no stable system of government behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2019 at 8:03 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

When did Dany present them with that choice in Astapor?

It would be like Grant saying “kill everyone in the south who is white.” Killing carte blache based on social markers can be just as scary as slavery IMO. Then Dany apparently makes the former slave owners work the fields without a wage. It’s just funny how there is like a bajillion contradictions in her chapters.

That's not quite accurate.

There were lots of poor white people in the South who were obviously poor and thus had no slaves. If you had slaves, you were relatively rich and so you dressed and behaved differently.

Granted, someone who has one or two slaves is going to behave and dress differently than someone who has fifty, much less a plantation full of three hundred. But it is what it is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SeanF said:

Irri is a volunteer.

i think it's plain from the chapters that Dany was disgusted by the treatment of slaves at Astapor.  What she did that day was righteous.  What she ought to criticised for is leaving no stable system of government behind.

Yes, but what else would Irri do?  Same goes for the Unsullied.  It was a nice piece of PR that Dany told them all they could walk free...but realistically, what are these totally damaged/abused/drugged/haven't done anything but fight since they were toddlers going to do?  So, there was never a chance that they would say 'okay bye' and same with Irri, she only knows the one way of living, but certainly she still  had much more legit agency than the Unsullied did.

And yes, Dany was truly appalled by everything Astapor, GRRM made it so bad that you could hardly help yourself from cheering when she stole the army and killed the masters...and everyone else in tokar including young teens.  But then, she can't stick the landing, because she is still most interested in her own stuff, freeing slaves and killing slavers was secondary to getting her army, which is why she leaves Astapor with a doomed to fail set up.  She also, as time went on, became more and more enamored of her savior image...which is where I expect the books will take her story...her previous actions of freeing slaves and trying to reshape slaver's bay will convince her that whatever she 'wants' is just...and down that road leads....well, we know where that road leads and it's not a happy ending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

A rescue mission? The majority of the drama and internal monologue in those chapters is about Jorah kissing her, how to win Westeros, and the dilemma of buying slaves, not how they need to be freed or how to help them transition out of slavery. Barristan warns that if she stays, her “heart will turn to brick,” with bricks representing an empire built on blood and cruelty. Arguably these chapters set her on the road toward losing her humanity because Catelyn had similar line that foreshadowed Stoneheart.

The Unsullied have to have some irony, something like Dany ends up killing children anyway because Westeros sees her as a slaver because she brought them there. A tidy war is very charmed.

 Well, I’m not using the phrase you used, “child sacrifice” because that’s just creepy.

There’s no authority here, she just took what she wanted. She acted like the khals who hang around threatening to attack. “What would Viserys and Rhaegar do?” is discussed but in taking the city she isn’t like either. She’s now more like her husband. 

Another contradiction that suggests things aren’t as simple as “liberation!!!” is that Irri is pleasuring her as a bed slave while she is considering the trade. Dany knows that Irri is acting in that role because she has to remind her that she freed her, but Irri is just doing the same thing she always did. She robotically repeats that it “is an honor to please you.” Irri is not truly free.

Those pages of internal thought clearly pointed to her concern for these men.  She was thinking about their training, the murdered puppies and infants and how they might be saved from the Masters.  

Her authority is as legitimate as anybody's who ever commanded and ruled.  The lady walked through burning fire and hatched dragons.  What is a Goddess if not someone who can do things ordinary mortals cannot.  Her family lineage makes her heir to Westeros and Valyria.  Marriage to Drogo made her Khaleesi.  Hatching dragons made her a Dragonlord and Mother of Dragons.  That's a lot of credentials. 

Speaking of authority, nobody gave the Starks that right to slaughter the Warg King and his sons, then force his daughters to marry.  Put in context, she has the authority to free the slaves.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Yes, but what else would Irri do?  Same goes for the Unsullied.  It was a nice piece of PR that Dany told them all they could walk free...but realistically, what are these totally damaged/abused/drugged/haven't done anything but fight since they were toddlers going to do?  So, there was never a chance that they would say 'okay bye' and same with Irri, she only knows the one way of living, but certainly she still  had much more legit agency than the Unsullied did.

And yes, Dany was truly appalled by everything Astapor, GRRM made it so bad that you could hardly help yourself from cheering when she stole the army and killed the masters...and everyone else in tokar including young teens.  But then, she can't stick the landing, because she is still most interested in her own stuff, freeing slaves and killing slavers was secondary to getting her army, which is why she leaves Astapor with a doomed to fail set up.  She also, as time went on, became more and more enamored of her savior image...which is where I expect the books will take her story...her previous actions of freeing slaves and trying to reshape slaver's bay will convince her that whatever she 'wants' is just...and down that road leads....well, we know where that road leads and it's not a happy ending.

I don't think Daenerys would have harmed Irri had she said No, or any Unsullied who wanted to leave.  But, I accept the Unsullied don't have a huge deal of choice, and Irri is besotted with Daenerys, like most of her followers. 

Dany's enjoyment of the violence and killing at Astapor, is a disturbing part of her chapter, even though she was right to turn against the Good Masters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I don't think Daenerys would have harmed Irri had she said No, or any Unsullied who wanted to leave.  But, I accept the Unsullied don't have a huge deal of choice, and Irri is besotted with Daenerys, like most of her followers. 

Dany's enjoyment of the violence and killing at Astapor, is a disturbing part of her chapter, even though she was right to turn against the Good Masters.

No, she certainly would not have harmed either, but it was still a good risk with little downside.  Even if half of the Unsullied did leave, she still has enhanced her rep by killing the Masters, has her dragon back, and has more soldiers than she started with.  Of course, a person might be forgiven for not wanting to do business w/her in the future, lest she come up with more creative ways out of the agreement.  The Astapor Masters are probably the worst group in the series, worse than either Yunkai or Meereen.

While I started to wonder, WTF?, after Astapor, I didn't fully and finally turn against her until her rule of Meereen, where after allowing a brutal sack of the city, she proved unequal to the task of ruling, ruling the city, ruling her dragons, ruling her own emotions. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

No, she certainly would not have harmed either, but it was still a good risk with little downside.  Even if half of the Unsullied did leave, she still has enhanced her rep by killing the Masters, has her dragon back, and has more soldiers than she started with.  Of course, a person might be forgiven for not wanting to do business w/her in the future, lest she come up with more creative ways out of the agreement.  The Astapor Masters are probably the worst group in the series, worse than either Yunkai or Meereen.

While I started to wonder, WTF?, after Astapor, I didn't fully and finally turn against her until her rule of Meereen, where after allowing a brutal sack of the city, she proved unequal to the task of ruling, ruling the city, ruling her dragons, ruling her own emotions. 

Yeah but Daenerys' ultimate failure in Meereen doesn't make her a villain. Or bad.

It simply puts her in the same category of other political failures who were otherwise good people and skillful in battle.

Yep, as of right now until we get The Winds of Winter, Dany is in the same position as Ned, Robb, Catelyn and Jon. Except Dany was fortunate enough to have an opportunity to escape and bold enough to take the chance before she was assassinated/executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Yeah but Daenerys' ultimate failure in Meereen doesn't make her a villain. Or bad.

It simply puts her in the same category of other political failures who were otherwise good people and skillful in battle.

Yep, as of right now until we get The Winds of Winter, Dany is in the same position as Ned, Robb, Catelyn and Jon. Except Dany was fortunate enough to have an opportunity to escape and bold enough to take the chance before she was assassinated/executed.

Well, it makes her a bad ruler, but sure, she is no villain as yet.  I'm not sure that puts her in the same category as the others you mention.  While they all have their own sets of flaws, none of them except Dany set out on a war of conquest with no plan beyond 'fire and blood' #winning #breakerofchains. The rest of them were dealing basically the hand that fate had dealt them.  Ned ruled the North and became hand at the request of his closest friend.  Robb marched South first to save his father and then to free the North, he never intended to annex any other parts of Westeros.  Jon was thrust into his leadership role by his peers, and he has sought to find peaceful means to deal with foes and allies alike.  Unlike the khaleesi.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

And yes, Dany was truly appalled by everything Astapor, GRRM made it so bad that you could hardly help yourself from cheering when she stole the army and killed the masters...and everyone else in tokar including young teens.  But then, she can't stick the landing, because she is still most interested in her own stuff, freeing slaves and killing slavers was secondary to getting her army, which is why she leaves Astapor with a doomed to fail set up.  She also, as time went on, became more and more enamored of her savior image...which is where I expect the books will take her story...her previous actions of freeing slaves and trying to reshape slaver's bay will convince her that whatever she 'wants' is just...and down that road leads....well, we know where that road leads and it's not a happy ending.

I fully agree with the bolded. Although Dany was moved by the plight of the Lhazareen and saved as many as she could by making them her slaves she also justified their enslavement by Drogo as the price of the IT.

Quote

Across the road, a girl no older than Dany was sobbing in a high thin voice as a rider shoved her over a pile of corpses, facedown, and thrust himself inside her. Other riders dismounted to take their turns. That was the sort of deliverance the Dothraki brought the Lamb Men. I am the blood of the dragon, Daenerys Targaryen reminded herself as she turned her face away. She pressed her lips together and hardened her heart and rode on toward the gate ... Khal Drogo would drive them downriver to one of the towns on Slaver’s Bay. She wanted to cry, but she told herself that she must be strong. This is war, this is what it looks like, this is the price of the Iron Throne.

Martin makes his description of Kraznys especially evil, to the point where he seems cartoonish. As you mentioned, Dany’s primary motive in frying Kraznys and killing the masters of Astapor was acquiring the unsullied without having to pay for them. The fact that she saved them from slavery was a welcome by-product.

I also feel that her staying in Meereen to learn to rule, apart from her wanting to plant trees and see it grow, is also her hubris in thinking she can make the people of Meereen better than they are. There’s a quote where she says if she can’t make them good, she can at least make them less bad. This to me, says that Dany has already begun defining what’s good and bad for people and cultures she has no understanding of. One can argue that this is what all Kings and medieval rulers did, but in those cases they are following some precedent or code or religious authority. In Dany’s case, she’s making the rules as she goes along. I’m reminded of the widow who lost her house and jewels during the sack of Meereen. Her husband and sons died defending her house but she fled. Because she fled, Dany arbitrarily rules that the widow has lost her claim to the house. The funny thing is that the widow’s plight is almost identical to Dany’s plight. In ruling that the widow has no claim to the house she left, Dany is indirectly passing judgment on her own claim to the IT.   

Dany’s feeling of righteous conquest and her savior complex will only get more pronounced in the next books. I’m pretty sure she’s going to leave behind more Astapors in Essos before she heads to Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, teej6 said:

I fully agree with the bolded. Although Dany was moved by the plight of the Lhazareen and saved as many as she could by making them her slaves she also justified their enslavement by Drogo as the price of the IT.

Martin makes his description of Kraznys especially evil, to the point where he seems cartoonish. As you mentioned, Dany’s primary motive in frying Kraznys and killing the masters of Astapor was acquiring the unsullied without having to pay for them. The fact that she saved them from slavery was a welcome by-product.

I also feel that her staying in Meereen to learn to rule, apart from her wanting to plant trees and see it grow, is also her hubris in thinking she can make the people of Meereen better than they are. There’s a quote where she says if she can’t make them good, she can at least make them less bad. This to me, says that Dany has already begun defining what’s good and bad for people and cultures she has no understanding of. One can argue that this is what all Kings and medieval rulers did, but in those cases they are following some precedent or code or religious authority. In Dany’s case, she’s making the rules as she goes along. I’m reminded of the widow who lost her house and jewels during the sack of Meereen. Her husband and sons died defending her house but she fled. Because she fled, Dany arbitrarily rules that the widow has lost her claim to the house. The funny thing is that the widow’s plight is almost identical to Dany’s plight. In ruling that the widow has no claim to the house she left, Dany is indirectly passing judgment on her own claim to the IT.   

Dany’s feeling of righteous conquest and her savior complex will only get more pronounced in the next books. I’m pretty sure she’s going to leave behind more Astapors in Essos before she heads to Westeros.

I might be okay with her taking over slaver's bay to remake it, and making whatever mistakes a person with little to no experience in ruling would make....if she had been willing to stick with it, but we know she won't.  She wants to be the 'mother' and good guy abolitionist while also still laying claim to Westeros as her birthright.  So, I assume, that she is going to learn all the wrong lessons from Meereen, she will not learn that ruling is especially hard w/no allies and no understanding of the culture [which applies to both Slaver's Bay and Westeros], instead she will, I assume again, learn that compromise with your enemies is the problem, and so she will go full fire and blood dracarys.  Doing basically the same mistakes in Westeros she made in Meereen only bigger and more deadly and against a much, much less evil set of adversaries.  So, she dooms herself to fail because she will never question the 'rightness' of her plans to rule all these strangers who she knows nothing of their histories, cultures, wants or needs, beyond in SB, the baseliness 'slavery is bad'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 1:38 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

Quote 1: “Slay the Good Masters, slay the soldiers, slay every man who wears a tokar or holds a whip, but harm no child under twelve, and strike the chains off every slave you see.” - Daenerys, ASOS

Quote 2: “In death he looked even younger than he had with blade in hand. “A boy,” said Dany. “He was only a boy.”
“Six-and-ten,” Hizdahr insisted. “A man grown, who freely chose to risk his life for gold and glory. No children die today in Daznak’s, as my gentle queen in her wisdom has decreed.” - Daenerys, ADWD

Quote 3: "A boy came, younger than Dany, slight and scarred, dressed up in a frayed grey tokar trailing silver fringe. His voice broke when he told of how two of his father's household slaves had risen up the night the gate broke. One had slain his father, the other his elder brother. Both had raped his mother before killing her as well. The boy had escaped with no more than the scar upon his face, but one of the murderers was still living in his father's house, and the other had joined the queen's soldiers as one of the Mother's Men. He wanted them both hanged. I am queen over a city built on dust and death. Dany had no choice but to deny him. She had declared a blanket pardon for all crimes committed during the sack. Nor would she punish slaves for rising up against their masters."- Daenerys, ADWD

Several questions here - 

First, is everyone who wears a tokar a slave master? Or, is the tokar the garment worn by free people, some of which are slave owners, some are not?

Second, at what age is a person in Slavers Bay responsible for slavery?

Third, would a person wearing a tokar, who is 12 years old, have been killed in the sack? If so, did Dany sanction child murder? (quotes 1, 2, 3)

Fourth, if she thinks 16 is a child, where did she come up with the number 12 before this? (referring to quote 1 and 2)

Finally, would you consider Mirri Maz Duur a slave who rose up against her master? (referring to Quote 3)

Quote 1: so do you assume that the unsullied actually followed these orders to the letter, or that they actually killed every Male of fighting age in Astapor?

Because in my opinion the Essos chapters that come after show evidence that they did not. Cleon can raise an army of new "unsullied" made up of the former masters, and there are still men of fighting age after that army loses when Quentyn and Co show up with the windblown. 

Most likely what happened is the slavers in Astapor surrenderd rather quickly after the initial unsullied onslaught.

Quote 2: 

Like Westeros, there seems to be no hard age for adulthood. 

Benjicot Blackwood leads both his own men and commands his vassel lords in combat(from the front) at age 11.

Conversely we have several crowned kings of this age of older whose Vassl lords attempt to keep power from for as long as possible on the pretext of age. Examples include Jahearys I and Aegon III.

Quote 3:

1.) Tokars are for people who do not work, the quotes are already in this thread but it is pretty  much physically impossible to work in one, so yea, they are for slavers.

2.) Maybe, most likely some such men/boys lived and some didn't.

3.&4. I agree with the others who have said that when referring to this boy, he looks younger now that he is dead, so he actual age is not relevant, only the observation that he looks too young.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, teej6 said:

Dany’s feeling of righteous conquest and her savior complex will only get more pronounced in the next books. I’m pretty sure she’s going to leave behind more Astapors in Essos before she heads to Westeros.

Exactly.  Those two aspects of her character are going to be critical to future plot development.  She'll abandon the wreckage of Mereen and go "home" only to wreak more havoc.  It is Known. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

No, she certainly would not have harmed either, but it was still a good risk with little downside.  Even if half of the Unsullied did leave, she still has enhanced her rep by killing the Masters, has her dragon back, and has more soldiers than she started with.  Of course, a person might be forgiven for not wanting to do business w/her in the future, lest she come up with more creative ways out of the agreement.  The Astapor Masters are probably the worst group in the series, worse than either Yunkai or Meereen.

While I started to wonder, WTF?, after Astapor, I didn't fully and finally turn against her until her rule of Meereen, where after allowing a brutal sack of the city, she proved unequal to the task of ruling, ruling the city, ruling her dragons, ruling her own emotions. 

 

The unsullied had a choice.  100% better than the choice their masters ever gave them which was 0%.  Giving them that chance was not a stunt.  It was an honest offer.  They chose to follow the woman who gave them their freedom.  I see nothing wrong with that.  They are now men with a purpose.

Meereen is in the middle of a social and economic reform.  It is way too premature to judge the outcome.  Millions of slaves are free because of Daenerys and her armies.  The only problem are the masters are still alive and opposing progress.  She is the best of the leaders we have come across within the time frame of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

Well, it makes her a bad ruler, but sure, she is no villain as yet.  I'm not sure that puts her in the same category as the others you mention.  While they all have their own sets of flaws, none of them except Dany set out on a war of conquest with no plan beyond 'fire and blood' #winning #breakerofchains. The rest of them were dealing basically the hand that fate had dealt them.  Ned ruled the North and became hand at the request of his closest friend.  Robb marched South first to save his father and then to free the North, he never intended to annex any other parts of Westeros.  Jon was thrust into his leadership role by his peers, and he has sought to find peaceful means to deal with foes and allies alike.  Unlike the khaleesi.  

Robb marched south and didn't really care whether his father was guilty or not.  Robb would not do any differently even if Ned had been guilty of treason.  He was technically guilty.  Robb did attempt to annex parts of Westeros and was willing to kill people in order to get it.  He's as bad as Balon.  Jon was chosen by his peers and he betrayed them over a sister.  That makes the worst of the examples you listed.  He sought to deal peacefully with the people he liked.  He chose to attack the people he didn't.  

Daenerys can't stand the Ghis but she knew she had to win them over in order to rule over them.  She gave peace a chance instead of giving lip service to peace like Jon did.  It was a risky peace and one not likely to work because the masters are so committed to slavery but it was worthwhile to give peace a chance.  Jon can't stand the Boltons and many of the men of the watch.  So he basically stopped trying to reach them and threw his support to the free folk.  Jon's is an example of the bad leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Tai Pan said:

The meaning of what our young heroine said is this:  Kill the Slave Owners, their paid Soldiers, but only if they are twelve and above.  This is perfectly reasonable to me.  It's more justice than Rickard Karstark, Ned Stark, Janos Slynt, and the butcher's boy got.

Look here, nobody ever said every enslaved person was a good person.  But understand this, slavery is still wrong.  Those ex-slaves who perpetrated this are no worse than the Lannister soldiers who sacked King's Landing during Robert's Rebellion and the Stark bannermen who wreaked havoc in the south during the War of the Five Kings.  The Wildlings would have done much worse than this to people who enslaved, humiliated, and made them suffer.  Tywin Lannister did worse than this to a woman whose only crime was loving his ugly son.

What happened to this young man can be blamed on his culture.  They made a practice of slavery.  What did he think would happen if the slaves ever got the upper hand?  And the parents.  How many slaves suffered and died because of the parents.  

The tokar is the garment of the slave-owning master class.  To wear one is to be a member of that class.  Any posing fool who is not a slave owner who chooses to wear one aspire to be a member of that class, support the owning of slaves, and rightly can be considered one of them.  The idiot chose to join this elite group of slavers.  He gets what they get.  

Irrelevant question, because in a slaving system, a five-year-old master can order his slaves to commit murder.  Stop thinking of these youngsters as modern kids.  Modern kids do not have the power to order a death nor do they sit in a coliseum and cheer on the spectacle of slaves killing each other.  

A 12 year old wearing a tokar is a slave owner, not a child.  That "child" has the authority from birth to order his slaves to commit murder, suicide, or fight in the arenas for his pleasure.  These are not innocent people.  It's not murder, it's liberation.  

Again, irrelevant questions.  MMD was never going to become free.  She's surrounded by 100 K Dothraki.  She herself had given up on life.  So what she did was done only out of spite and vengeance.  She took out her anger on the only person among the Dothraki who showed her any kindness.  

Dany has good reasons.  Letting these guys live invite danger.  They are old enough to take up arms and take up revenge.  I would have had them executed too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Yep, as of right now until we get The Winds of Winter, Dany is in the same position as Ned, Robb, Catelyn and Jon. Except Dany was fortunate enough to have an opportunity to escape and bold enough to take the chance before she was assassinated/executed.

She is in a better position than Ned, Robb, Catelyn, and Jon because she's more intelligent than they were.  The Starks  betrayed the people who support them.  The Starks betrayed the people whose very support they depended on.  It's fine to cross the enemy but it is suicide to cross people you depended on.  Just ask Robb Stark but be warned he may have to respond in sign language because he lost his tongue along with his head.  Keep your troops happy and they will remain loyal.  Robb, Catelyn, and Jon betrayed that important rule of leadership.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Annalee said:

She is in a better position than Ned, Robb, Catelyn, and Jon because she's more intelligent than they were.  The Starks  betrayed the people who support them.  The Starks betrayed the people whose very support they depended on.  It's fine to cross the enemy but it is suicide to cross people you depended on.  Just ask Robb Stark but be warned he may have to respond in sign language because he lost his tongue along with his head.  Keep your troops happy and they will remain loyal.  Robb, Catelyn, and Jon betrayed that important rule of leadership.  

Robb may have betrayed the people supporting him but Jon got betrayed by the people he was leading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

That's not quite accurate.

There were lots of poor white people in the South who were obviously poor and thus had no slaves. If you had slaves, you were relatively rich and so you dressed and behaved differently.

Granted, someone who has one or two slaves is going to behave and dress differently than someone who has fifty, much less a plantation full of three hundred. But it is what it is...

I was trying to think an equivalent for mass killing based on social markers, a la Dany style! It's kind of hard for clothing in our world. Either way it sounds supremely lucky and easy for her if everyone she ordered killed was exactly who she intended. 

12 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Her authority is as legitimate as anybody's who ever commanded and ruled.  The lady walked through burning fire and hatched dragons.  What is a Goddess if not someone who can do things ordinary mortals cannot.  Her family lineage makes her heir to Westeros and Valyria.  Marriage to Drogo made her Khaleesi.  Hatching dragons made her a Dragonlord and Mother of Dragons.  That's a lot of credentials. 

Speaking of authority, nobody gave the Starks that right to slaughter the Warg King and his sons, then force his daughters to marry.  Put in context, she has the authority to free the slaves.

Nobody cares about a resume for conquerors; they just take whatever they want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Annalee said:

Dany has good reasons.  Letting these guys live invite danger.  They are old enough to take up arms and take up revenge.  I would have had them executed too.

Sounds easy but anyone younger that twelve (if she even hit that target correctly?) is now a vengeful little Arya growing up to be another Mirri because she killed their parents and friends. It's a hydra. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×