Ser Barristan Selmy- truly a "True Knight"?

[frenin]

9 minutes ago, Dofs said:

Jaime was organising defence of Aerys before he ordered Jaime to kill Tywin and Rossart to blow up the city. Only then did Jaime finally turn against him.

Edit: 

Jaime had no idea how quickly would the castle fall, which is why he was caught by Lannister forces in the first place. He did not want to be seen killing Aerys and neither he was in a hurry of doing it. Hence he clearly misjudged where the Lannister forces were.

He changed his armour because he didn't want to kill Aerys as a Kingsguard, but the fact that he took his time to do it also obviously implies that Jaime didn't believe he had little time left to kill Aerys and leave unseen.

I know where he was, but when he killed Rossart Aerys was alone and isolated, the Throne completely empty and the Lannisters were on the verge to get into the castle, for a guy who was in such rush to prevent Aerys from killing everyone, he took his time to change his armour and all.

 

Edit: When Jaime entered the Throne room, the Castle had already fallen and the Lannisters were heading to the Throne room, it's literally impossible that Jaime didn't know that when even Aerys knew they were inside the walls because Rossart had told him... before he was killed, i can buy that Jaime may have misjudged the time the Lannisters would take to storm the Throne room, but he perfectly knew Aerys was done when he went after him.

[Dofs]

13 minutes ago, frenin said:

I know where he was, but when he killed Rossart Aerys was alone and isolated, the Throne completely empty and the Lannisters were on the verge to get into the castle, for a guy who was in sucha rush to prevent Aerys from killing everyone, he took his time to change his armour and all.

Eh, I was too late with my edit of my previous post, as I addressed it in there. I'll repeat my point.

Jaime was in a rush to kill Rossart, which he did the first thing, then he changed his armour because he didn't want to kill his king as a Kingsguard (and didn't think about changing his cloak as well which everyone remembered him anyway) and then went to kill Aerys. Aerys had already ordered Rossart to light the wildfire and was waiting for the city to blow up, hence Jaime wasn't in a rush to kill Aerys so that he wouldn't be able to give the order, the order was already given.

Also Jaime had no idea how close the Lannisters were to getting to Aerys. He actually planned to leave unseen after killing the Mad King, so considering that he took time to change his armour and then wasn't in any rush during the actual killing, he clearly didn't expect for the Lannister forces to come so soon.

[frenin]

1 minute ago, Dofs said:

Eh, I was too late with my edit of my previous post, as I addressed it in there. I'll repeat my point.

Jaime was in a rush to kill Rossart, which he did the first thing, then he changed his armour because he didn't want to kill his king as a Kingsguard (and didn't think about changing his cloak as well which everyone remembered him anyway) and then went to kill Aerys. Aerys had already ordered Rossart to light the wildfire and was waiting for the city to blow up, hence Jaime wasn't in a rush to kill Aerys so that he wouldn't be able to give the order, the order was already given.

Also Jaime had no idea how close the Lannisters were to getting to Aerys. He actually planned to leave unseen after killing the Mad King, so considering that he took time to change his armour and then wasn't in any rush during the actual killing, he clearly didn't expect for tyhe Lannister forces to come so soon.

Edit: When Jaime entered the Throne room, the Castle had already fallen and the Lannisters were heading to the Throne room, it's literally impossible that Jaime didn't know that when even Aerys knew they were inside the walls because Rossart had told him... before he was killed, i can buy that Jaime may have misjudged the time the Lannisters would take to storm the Throne room, but he perfectly knew Aerys was done when he went after him.

[Dofs]

17 minutes ago, frenin said:

Edit: When Jaime entered the Throne room, the Castle had already fallen and the Lannisters were heading to the Throne room, it's literally impossible that Jaime didn't know that when even Aerys knew they were inside the walls because Rossart had told him... before he was killed, i can buy that Jaime may have misjudged the time the Lannisters would take to storm the Throne room, but he perfectly knew Aerys was done when he went after him.

Jaime was the one defending the Red Keep and he left his post to kill Rossart and Aerys and lost track of the situation before his father's forces entered the castle walls. Lannisters likely entered soon after but Jaime was already away set on his mission.

 

[frenin]

27 minutes ago, Dofs said:

Jaime was the one defending the Red Keep and he left his post to kill Rossart and Aerys and lost track of the situation before his father's forces entered the castle walls. Lannisters likely entered soon after but Jaime was already away set on his mission.

 

He could not have walked in the Throne room without noticing the Lannisters were already there, Westerling and  Crakehall entered just after Jaime killed Aerys, it's impossible. Jaime knew that they were about to fall  anyway when he left his post. Aerys was alone and  isolated, his men dying while he didn't even know about Rossart's death, Jaime having to kill Aerys no matter what just doesn't make sense.

[Dofs]

15 minutes ago, frenin said:

He could not have walked in the Throne room without noticing the Lannisters were already there, Westerling and  Crakehall entered just after Jaime killed Aerys, it's impossible. Jaime knew that they were about to fall  anyway when he left his post. Aerys was alone and  isolated, his men dying while he didn't even know about Rossart's death, Jaime having to kill Aerys no matter what just doesn't make sense.

Jaime clearly didn't notice that Lannisters were already about to enter the Throne Room because Westerling and Crakehall took him by surprise, it's plainly said in the text. And it's perfectly possible because Jaime entered the Throne Room (which is enormous) through the backdoor while Westerling and Crakehall through the main entrance - they entered the room from different sides and didn't see each other beforehand.

Jaime knew that Aerys was about to lose but how soon he had no idea: half an hour, hour? And during that who know what would have happened, another pyromancer could have come and Aerys could have given another order because Rossart was taking too long. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

1 hour ago, Platypus Rex said:

It's a hypothetical illustration intended to illustrate an abstract concept.

Yes, I understand 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

If you don't accept the terms of the hypothetical, we can't discuss the abstract concept.

It isn't necessarily that I won't accept the terms, it's more that it doesn't really apply to the discussion at hand if it isn't realistic. 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

Whether the example is realistic is rather beside the point.  Nonetheless, your ideas about driving are incredibly ignorant

More insults. Way to get your point across. I assure you I know how to drive very safely & soundly but thanks for your concern. 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

At highway speeds, it is much easier to swerve a couple of feet in one direction or another, than it is to bring your car to a stop from a speed of 55 mph.  If you can't accept this, then just imagine that someone has sabotaged your brakes.  I don't care.

Sure but that's adding another element to your scenario because when you are going slower this isn't the case. 

I'm really not sure what you want from me here. IF someone was in this totally unrealistic scenario where they are driving down a highway & all of a sudden there are 2 children who also happen to be blocking every possible route & you have no choice but to hit one of them, so you do hit one of them, then no you are not to blame. 

There is no set of circumstances where it is morally right & good to kill a child. Is that better than saying it's morally wrong to kill a child 100% of the time? 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

understand what you are saying perfectly.  It is you who are refusing to understand what I am saying

I think that you do also that's why I said you were arguing in bad faith when you repeatedly stated that I didn't believe what I am telling you I believe. 

If I'm misunderstanding you, it is not on purpose. 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

You remember your a distinction between a morally wrong act, and THE morally wrong choice? 

No, I don't remember making a distinction between a morally wrong act & a morally wrong choice. There isn't much difference that I can see. When you act, you have chosen to act so if the act is morally wrong, the choice was as well. 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

Well, when I say something is morally wrong, my meaning is closer to the latter.  And (unlike you) I DO think Jaime made "THE" morally wrong choice.  

There we are. See how easy that was? We disagree that Jaime made the best choice available to him. We could have spent all this time discussing why we feel it was or wasn't the best choice instead of taking about unrealistic, hypothetical scenarios, completely dissecting the phrase "morally wrong", and insults but it is what it is. 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

I love how SELF-RIGHTEOUS you are being about Jaime's crime.

Yeah, I'm so self righteous. Which part of what I've said has given you that idea? Where I spoke of how incredibly hard it would be to make this choice? Or when I spoke of how morally wrong it is? Or maybe it was when I talked about it being something I would feel shameful for? 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

Well, at least you cannot reasonably pretend to understand what I meant when I said that Jaime is unrepentant.  I merely meant he has the same attitude toward his crime as you would have if you were in his place

And I'm self-righteous? Please tell me what attitude toward the crime is that? 

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

And yes, we do have a different set of morals

Thankfully. 

[Texas Hold Em]

On 1/5/2020 at 7:06 PM, Damsel in Distress said:

Barristan chose to join the Kingsguard and with that choice come privileges like a job for life but it also comes with giving up the freedom to act freely.  He knew all of that going in.  Therefore, he was not wrong to allow King Aerys to do as he wanted.  That was not the role of the Kingsguard.  They have a very defined role, to protect Aerys.  Joining the Kingsguard is not like taking a job as a retail clerk.  It comes with heavy obligations and limitations.  Selmy knew that going in and therefore he is more correct to not interfere with Aerys' domestic problems.  

I agree.  It is a difficult matter for some people to understand but this is what a pilot in the Air Force can expect.  The pilot doesn't get a chance to decide who to drop the bomb on.  He (or She) made the decision to become a fighter pilot.  With that decision comes the realization that this person will give up the right to make those kinds of decisions.  The pilot is commanded to fly and drop the bomb on who his government told him to.  People who have chosen to serve in the military in some capacities know this ahead of time.  They cannot back out later on if they disagree with an order.  The decision to obey was made when they chose to train and become a pilot.

[Platypus Rex]

On 1/7/2020 at 7:53 PM, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I'm really not sure what you want from me here. IF someone was in this totally unrealistic scenario where they are driving down a highway & all of a sudden there are 2 children who also happen to be blocking every possible route & you have no choice but to hit one of them, so you do hit one of them, then no you are not to blame. 

Yeah.  That was my point.  Merely that it is possible to imagine moral dilemmas where both outcomes are equally bad, and therefore, "you are not to blame".

Very simple point.  Very basic point.  But you make things WAY too hard.  

Had you been able to accept that very simple point, we could perhaps have moved on to a discussion of why I do NOT believe Jaime's moral dilemma is a moral dilemma of this type.  But it's not worth the effort.

Quote

Yeah, I'm so self righteous. Which part of what I've said has given you that idea? Where I spoke of how incredibly hard it would be to make this choice? Or when I spoke of how morally wrong it is? Or maybe it was when I talked about it being something I would feel shameful for? 

Yeah, look at you patting yourself on the back.  You have such a good heart.  Look at those bitter tears you wept while you killed that child.  It is not like it was EASY.  I'm just imagining your letter to the parole board regarding this hypothetical child murder, as you apply for early release.  And I'm imagining your outrage when the application gets denied because the parole board says you are "completely unrepentant".  You just don't get it.  And, I suppose, you never will.  Bye.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

29 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

Yeah.  That was my point.  Merely that it is possible to imagine moral dilemmas where both outcomes are equally bad, and therefore, "you are not to blame".

You know a much simpler way to say that would have been "It I'd possible to imagine moral dilemmas where both outcomes are equally bad and therefore you are not to blame" 

That doesn't really pertain here, so I still don't know why you spent so long with it but ok. 

31 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

Very simple point.  Very basic point.  But you make things WAY too hard

I do? You're kidding right? 

32 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

Had you been able to accept that very simple point, we could perhaps have moved on to a discussion of why I do NOT believe Jaime's moral dilemma is a moral dilemma of this type.  But it's not worth the effort.

Oh you are something else. 

32 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

Yeah, look at you patting yourself on the back.  You have such a good heart.  Look at those bitter tears you wept while you killed that child.  It is not like it was EASY.  I'm just imagining your letter to the parole board regarding this hypothetical child murder, as you apply for early release.  And I'm imagining your outrage when the application gets denied because the parole board says you are "completely unrepentant".  You just don't get it.  And, I suppose, you never will.  Bye.

You have criticized & insulted me through out this entire exchange but yeah the one time I defend myself it's me patting myself on the back. 

You take my words & twist them or out right change them to fit what you want to be arguing against. You talk in circles. You insult & criticize me rather than my beliefs. You don't respond to any of the times you have been called out on it or proven wrong & then get angry & pretend you have any idea as to the kind of person I am. You speak as if your opinion is the only one that matters & most certainly the only one that is right or worth having. Anyone with a difference of opinion is stupid, ignorant, self-righteous, & my personal favorite "unrepentant" It's absurd but it's been entertaining nonetheless. I wish you well in all your glorious righteousness. 

Thanks for the chat. 

[Big P]

On 1/7/2020 at 8:31 PM, Texas Hold Em said:

I agree.  It is a difficult matter for some people to understand but this is what a pilot in the Air Force can expect.  The pilot doesn't get a chance to decide who to drop the bomb on.  He (or She) made the decision to become a fighter pilot.  With that decision comes the realization that this person will give up the right to make those kinds of decisions.  The pilot is commanded to fly and drop the bomb on who his government told him to.  People who have chosen to serve in the military in some capacities know this ahead of time.  They cannot back out later on if they disagree with an order.  The decision to obey was made when they chose to train and become a pilot.

[Platypus Rex]

22 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

You have criticized & insulted me through out this entire exchange but yeah the one time I defend myself it's me patting myself on the back. 

You take my words & twist them or out right change them to fit what you want to be arguing against. You talk in circles. You insult & criticize me rather than my beliefs. You don't respond to any of the times you have been called out on it or proven wrong & then get angry & pretend you have any idea as to the kind of person I am. You speak as if your opinion is the only one that matters & most certainly the only one that is right or worth having. Anyone with a difference of opinion is stupid, ignorant, self-righteous, & my personal favorite "unrepentant" It's absurd but it's been entertaining nonetheless. I wish you well in all your glorious righteousness. 

My opinions are about Jaime.  My criticisms are of Jaime.  You injected yourself into the debate between me and Jaime like a protestor lying down in front of a bulldozer.  And now you are playing the victim because I stick to my position.

[Dofs]

3 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

You injected yourself into the debate between me and Jaime

Wait, Jaime posts here? 

[Platypus Rex]

1 minute ago, Dofs said:

Wait, Jaime posts here? 

LOL, no.  It's a metaphor.  There's no bulldozer posting here either.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

2 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

My opinions are about Jaime.  My criticisms are of Jaime.  You injected yourself into the debate between me and Jaime like a protestor lying down in front of a bulldozer.  And now you are playing the victim because I stick to my position.

Oh, my bad. I thought this was a public forum meant for discussion. I was unaware that there were rules about not speaking until spoken to.

The criticisms I'm speaking of were of me not Jaime, hence why I said you criticized me & not my thoughts. No victim playing just plain old fashioned truth. 

I can go back through & quote the times you insulted me, personally if you would like but I imagine you know very well what has been said. 

[Nagini's Neville]

On 7. Januar 2020 at 2:55 AM, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Ahh! You almost forgot about that part didn't ya? 

RamSaY GoOd, JoN StOopiD TrAiTOr.

It is known. 

Of course  But what's it with the big letters- never understood it.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

5 hours ago, Nagini's Neville said:

Of course  But what's it with the big letters- never understood it.

It's just a way to show in writing that I think those are stupid words. 

It's kinda like when someone says something really ridiculous & you repeat it in a stupid voice. 

It's childish of me & I probably shouldn't do it, but sometimes I can't resist. 

[Nagini's Neville]

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

It's just a way to show in writing that I think those are stupid words. 

It's kinda like when someone says something really ridiculous & you repeat it in a stupid voice. 

It's childish of me & I probably shouldn't do it, but sometimes I can't resist. 

Omg LOL Thanks!

And I always tried to understand the "hidden message", only reading the capital letters - never made sense.

No it's fun! Just like trolling  You should definitely do it more often!

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

9 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

Omg LOL Thanks!

And I always tried to understand the "hidden message", only reading the capital letters - never made sense.

No it's fun! Just like trolling  You should definitely do it more often!

 

haha! yes! Like trolling!! 

[Platypus Rex]

18 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Oh, my bad. I thought this was a public forum meant for discussion. I was unaware that there were rules about not speaking until spoken to.

Not what I was trying to say at all.

18 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I can go back through & quote the times you insulted me, personally if you would like but I imagine you know very well what has been said. 

Knock yourself out.

I am completely unrepentant.  I do not think that anything I have said or done is blameworthy.  There is no redemption arc for me, assuming I have done anything wrong (which I don't think I have).

Note that I'm not insulting myself (any more than I was insulting you, when I said you were unrepentant).  I'm only illustrating the abstract idea that one cannot have repentance (and by further extension, one cannot have redemption or a redemption arc) without an acknowledgment that one's actions are blameworthy.  And if one is right in one's assessment that one has done nothing blameworthy, then no redemption, or redemption arc, is needed. 

But I think Jaime's choice was indeed blameworthy.  And I see no repentance by him, and by extension, no redemption arc for him.

And I'm not going to change my mind just because you put yourself in Jaime's shoes.  Be as offended as you like.