Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mario Seddy

Is Daenerys justified in wiping out House Lannister/Baratheon since they tried to do the same to House Targaryen?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, James West said:

She would be totally justified in taking back the seven kingdoms.  She has that right just as the Starks have a right to attempt to take back Winterfell. 

How refreshing, a defense of divine right.

Share this post


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

How refreshing, a defense of divine right.

Well that is what this world that Martin created is based on. Westeros is not exactly an enlightened society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

Well that is what this world that Martin created is based on. Westeros is not exactly an enlightened society.

Yes, but we should be able to read past that and use some critical thinking of our own. Dany attacking Westeros is not justified, in the end she will only cause more death, same thing with the Starks in the North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

Why?Do you think a 10 year boy will march an army against her?:lol:

I mean, he is marching with his father off to war. :rofl:

Sam's story direction is interesting, he seems like a boiling kettle and the wrath of a gentle man is going to be amazing. I think there are several pillars set up to fall, that will make him explode. The Citadel's ignorance, Jon threatening Gilly and switching her kid, and Dickon...who is suspiciously given these odd details. Why make him get married so young and have him march off to war with Randyll? Why have Sam constantly reflect on how he thinks Dickon is safe with his sisters in Horn Hill? Also can you imagine Jon and Dany both personally attacking Sam's loved ones - and then they become a couple??? Sam is going to go ballistic and I can't wait.

Share this post


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

Yes, but we should be able to read past that and use some critical thinking of our own. Dany attacking Westeros is not justified, in the end she will only cause more death, same thing with the Starks in the North.

Sure use critical thinking but in my opinion the conclusions you make should fit into the world that Martin created and there is no doubt that in the world Martin created not only is it justified for a highborn starting a war to reclaim a  birthright it is also expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

Sure use critical thinking but in my opinion the conclusions you make should fit into the world that Martin created and there is no doubt that in the world Martin created not only is it justified for a highborn starting a war to reclaim a  birthright it is also expected.

No, it's not justified, or else what she did in Slaver's Bay was an abomination. What she did there, and Robert's Rebellion where justified because they where using violent menas, yes, but their goal was to improve the world. Waging war because you have purple eyes is wrong, in Westeros too, and the themes of the story reveal as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

No, it's not justified, or else what she did in Slaver's Bay was an abomination. What she did there, and Robert's Rebellion where justified because they where using violent menas, yes, but their goal was to improve the world. Waging war because you have purple eyes is wrong, in Westeros too, and the themes of the story reveal as much.

Huh?  She would be waging war to take back the lands that were stolen from her family.  What do the color of her eyes have to do with anything?

We are going to have agree to disagree on this one.

Share this post


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

No, it's not justified, or else what she did in Slaver's Bay was an abomination. What she did there, and Robert's Rebellion where justified because they where using violent menas, yes, but their goal was to improve the world. Waging war because you have purple eyes is wrong, in Westeros too, and the themes of the story reveal as much.

It’s a good example of values dissonance. We worry about whether a war is just (ultimately Thomas Acquinas had a big impact on our attitude to war).  I think to an extent, this applies in-universe.  Both the rebels against Aerys , and Dany in Slavers Bay, had just cause to wage war against their respective enemies.

As against that, is the view that war is simply the ultimate argument of kings, which most leaders would share.  Or at any rate, it is just to wage war to regain what you believe to be rightfully yours, to avenge wrongs done to your family etc.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


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

Huh?  She would be waging war to take back the lands that were stolen from her family.  What do the color of her eyes have to do with anything?

We are going to have agree to disagree on this one.

it was a joke about her claim. 

No, it's not justified, or else what she did in Slaver's Bay was an abomination. What she did there, and Robert's Rebellion where justified because they where using violent menas, yes, but their goal was to improve the world. Waging war because you are entitled to rule is wrong, in Westeros too, and the themes of the story reveal as much.

Is t better now?

Share this post


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

 

As against that, is the view that war is simply the ultimate argument of kings, which most leaders would share.  Or at any rate, it is just to wage war to regain what you believe to be rightfully yours, to avenge wrongs done to your family etc.

I think the series itself disagrees with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, saltedmalted said:

But she has a bone to pick with them.

Does she? Dany never thinks about them at all, or even appears aware of their existence. She forgave Barristan for serving the Usuper quickly enough, so she doesn't appear to hold grudges. Why would Dany have a bone to pick with children she doesn't even know or care about?

 

9 hours ago, saltedmalted said:

Daenerys will come looking for trouble. 

Maybe she will, maybe she won't. If by trouble you mean pressing her claim to the throne, then yeah, probably. This only puts the Stark kids in trouble if they back Young Griff, which, why would they? 

9 hours ago, saltedmalted said:

Ned opposed the killing of defenceless children, not invaders.

Fair point. But Dany also opposes killing defenseless children. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said:

Does she? Dany never thinks about them at all, or even appears aware of their existence. She forgave Barristan for serving the Usuper quickly enough, so she doesn't appear to hold grudges. Why would Dany have a bone to pick with children she doesn't even know or care about?

Maybe they won't accept her as queen. Maybe she's paranoid about them. Maybe she's right. Maybe they think Ned/Robert were justified and don't trust her as a Targaryen. 

Surely would be an interesting choice by the author to decrease the conflict between characters, rather than ratchet it up...

25 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said:

Fair point. But Dany also opposes killing defenseless children. 

Only if they're 12 years old, then it's fine. 

But you know, that age limit could drop. The game (and dragons) changes people. If Dany has to walk over dead children to get back her birthright, of course she will instantly drop it, right??

3 hours ago, El Guapo said:

Sure use critical thinking but in my opinion the conclusions you make should fit into the world that Martin created and there is no doubt that in the world Martin created not only is it justified for a highborn starting a war to reclaim a  birthright it is also expected.

There's a judgmental tone in the reclamation plots for titles - Look at JonCon and Arianne. The tone is "oh look another one *eyeroll*" It's even more judgmental when the claimant expects it to be easy and quick without innocents getting hurt or without much effort. Look at Falyse Stokeworth nattering on about Bronn stealing her castle and how hilariously it all fell apart because her husband was an idiot and didn't want to get his hands dirty. I mean...that's the whole game. Dany wants just as much as Cersei - and more (two continents, two thrones). So winning all 7k=Getting her hands dirtier than Cersei. Lmao.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To forgive the Lannisters it sets  a very dangerous precedent that anyone who back stabs the Targaryens can get away with it. 

The Starks have done this multiple times with House frost, house Greystark and the warg and Marsh kings. 

The Boltons are a prime example of why you do not  leave loose ends. 

Edited by Mario Seddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Maybe they won't accept her as queen. Maybe she's paranoid about them. Maybe she's right. Maybe they think Ned/Robert were justified and don't trust her as a Targaryen. 

Surely would be an interesting choice by the author to decrease the conflict between characters, rather than ratchet it up...

Only if they're 12 years old, then it's fine. 

But you know, that age limit could drop. The game (and dragons) changes people. If Dany has to walk over dead children to get back her birthright, of course she will instantly drop it, right??

There's a judgmental tone in the reclamation plots for titles - Look at JonCon and Arianne. The tone is "oh look another one *eyeroll*" It's even more judgmental when the claimant expects it to be easy and quick without innocents getting hurt or without much effort. Look at Falyse Stokeworth nattering on about Bronn stealing her castle and how hilariously it all fell apart because her husband was an idiot and didn't want to get his hands dirty. I mean...that's the whole game. Dany wants just as much as Cersei - and more (two continents, two thrones). So winning all 7k=Getting her hands dirtier than Cersei. Lmao.

 

I think Arianne is a good example of a basically kind-natured person, who does not appreciate just what sort of snake-pit she has jumped into.  Assisted by her father keeping her out of the loop for a long time.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

This only puts the Stark kids in trouble if they back Young Griff, which, why would they? 

Why would they back anyone?

5 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

Why would Dany have a bone to pick with children she doesn't even know or care about?

Because they rule the kingdoms Daenerys wants.

5 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

But Dany also opposes killing defenseless children. 

Not enough to halt her plans of invasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

Why would they back anyone?

Because they rule the kingdoms Daenerys wants.

Not enough to halt her plans of invasion.

Which kingdom does a Stark child currently rule?

Share this post


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

I mean, he is marching with his father off to war. :rofl:

Is he really????:blink:

 

9 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Sam's story direction is interesting, he seems like a boiling kettle and the wrath of a gentle man is going to be amazing. I think there are several pillars set up to fall, that will make him explode. The Citadel's ignorance, Jon threatening Gilly and switching her kid, and Dickon...who is suspiciously given these odd details.

I also find Sam interesting and I'm looking forward to see how he goes in Old Town.

 

9 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Why make him get married so young and have him march off to war with Randyll? Why have Sam constantly reflect on how he thinks Dickon is safe with his sisters in Horn Hill?

Maybe because he wanted to be sure that Dickon will be the heir of Horn Hill.:dunno:
Also,why put him in danger if Randyll wanted so bad to get rid of Sam so he could give Horn Hill to his youngest son?(Not to mention that he is only 10 fucking years old)
I really can't imagine a 10 year old boy in a battlefiled.The yongest character that has gone to war in ASoIaF is Robb (If I recall well).If you find a quote about Dickon marching at war with his father please qoute it because I really don't remember and I also find it very silly

 

9 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Also can you imagine Jon and Dany both personally attacking Sam's loved ones - and then they become a couple??? Sam is going to go ballistic and I can't wait.

You're such a sadist....:lol:

Edited by Dracul's Daughter

Share this post


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

Which kingdom does a Stark child currently rule?

By the time Daenerys comes to Westeros things would have changed enormously. The OP mentions Baratheons too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

Is he really????:blink:

 

I also find Sam interesting and I'm looking forward to see how he goes in Old Town.

 

Maybe because he wanted to be sure that Dickon will be the heir of Horn Hill.:dunno:
Also,why put him in danger if Randyll wanted so bad to get rid of Sam so he could give Horn Hill to his youngest son?(Not to mention that he is only 10 fucking years old)
I really can't imagine a 10 year old boy in a battlefiled.The yongest character that has gone to war in ASoIaF is Robb (If I recall well).If you find a quote about Dickon marching at war with his father please qoute it because I really don't remember and I also find it very silly

 

You're such a sadist....:lol:

Ten years is old enough to be on the battlefield, as a squire.  Upper class boys would start training at seven.  In medieval England, you were old enough to be hanged at that age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...