So did Dany have that little girl tortured?

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Given what we know of Stannis? Fuck yeah

The city would have been sacked and Joffrey, Tyrion, Cersei and the rest would have been strung up.  He’s even willing to kill Tommen and Myrcella because they’re “abominations”.

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

The wine seller and his family are likely guilty.  Rough questioning of the man and his daughters is a very reasonable thing to do.  The chances of another person poisoning the merchandise is very small. 

[CamiloRP]

6 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

If she kills and tortures randomly by group, she is no better than them. The road to hell and all that. 

 I fundamentally disagree with this. You are basically saying people are either 'good' or bad, and it doesn't matter the degree to which they are either. Dany tortured a couple of girls, and undeniably disgusting act, she also did some other horrid things, but she is not on the same level as the slavers, she didn't raped, tortured and enslave millions of people. If by doing what she did, she is as bad as people that did all these things, wouldn't Jaime be as bad as her for the attempted murder of Bran? wouldn't Arya be as bad as her for he actual murder of a lot of people? Wouldn't Ned be as bad as them for the murder of Gared and keeping Theon as a hostage? wouldn't Robert be as bad as them for pardoning Tywin over the murder of Ellia, Aegon and Rhaenys? Where does it end?

[CamiloRP]

6 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Ironically that one should definitely be respected and if it was things would be a lot better.

But it's a fundamentally unjust system, that keeps a parasitic class stealing the resources of the smallfolk for no reason. I never thought this would be a controversial statement, but divine right is utterly bullshit.

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

2 hours ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

The wine seller and his family are likely guilty.

There is no evidence that they were guilty.

[Daeron the Daring]

3 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

There is no evidence that they were guilty.

No there is none, but the two Unsullied were poisoned in his shop. And noone else was arrested, means either noone else was there or they're protecting someone.

And it's also hilarious how people imagine the daughter/s as little kids.

They can actually be from any age they can work to 50 years old, remaining in the family business or something (tho they are likely not 50, obviously).

If noone else was in the shop, who killed them then? Or if there was someone, why didn't he tell it already? I'd like if someone does actually answer questions.

Wnd also, I imagine "questioning sharply" is nowhere near what a torturer would do (Qyburn, for example). It is likely nowhere near an actual physical torture we see sometimes.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

 I fundamentally disagree with this. You are basically saying people are either 'good' or bad, and it doesn't matter the degree to which they are either. Dany tortured a couple of girls, and undeniably disgusting act, she also did some other horrid things, but she is not on the same level as the slavers, she didn't raped, tortured and enslave millions of people. If by doing what she did, she is as bad as people that did all these things, wouldn't Jaime be as bad as her for the attempted murder of Bran? wouldn't Arya be as bad as her for he actual murder of a lot of people? Wouldn't Ned be as bad as them for the murder of Gared and keeping Theon as a hostage? wouldn't Robert be as bad as them for pardoning Tywin over the murder of Ellia, Aegon and Rhaenys? Where does it end?

It’s made pretty clear to us that every main character is varying shades of grey, and quite capable of doing bad things, as well as good, because they are like all of us.  None of us would keep our hands clean if we suddenly found ourselves propelled into this world, or one of our own world’s war zones.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

4 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

I never thought this would be a controversial statement, but divine right is utterly bullshit

It deffo is, but in a pre enligthenment society it's a far better choice than force of arms as it means no civil wars

[Aldarion]

13 hours ago, SeanF said:

They were punished for being the leaders of a city, whose government murdered 163 children.

I’ve seen nothing in the text to suggest any degree of opposition to this atrocity, among the city’s leaders.

Then the whole of the ruling class should have been executed, not just 163 random dudes. As it was, it was not justice, it was vengeance - and that is clearly seen in the fact that executed Maesters numbered the same as the children.

If it was justice, then the guilty would have been executed - and if Daenerys believes in guilt by association, then it would have meant every single Master. Not just 163 of them.

6 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

But it's a fundamentally unjust system, that keeps a parasitic class stealing the resources of the smallfolk for no reason. I never thought this would be a controversial statement, but divine right is utterly bullshit.

In real life, divine right of kings wasn't even a thing until well into modernity (17th century, to be exact). Why do we assume Westeros has it? Also, it is not bullshit: it is meant to stabilize the political system that is inherently given to strife. And it is not the only way system was stabilized either: some monarchies had regular elections and/or parliaments (Hungary being a good example in that it had both elections and parliament).

And from what we have seen of Planetos, a just system is inherently impossible - unless everyone gets turned into an undead zombie, but even that will not achieve either justice or equality as you'll be ruled by the Others. 

[SeanF]

15 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

Then the whole of the ruling class should have been executed, not just 163 random dudes. As it was, it was not justice, it was vengeance - and that is clearly seen in the fact that executed Maesters numbered the same as the children.

If it was justice, then the guilty would have been executed - and if Daenerys believes in guilt by association, then it would have meant every single Master. Not just 163 of them.

In real life, divine right of kings wasn't even a thing until well into modernity (17th century, to be exact). Why do we assume Westeros has it? Also, it is not bullshit: it is meant to stabilize the political system that is inherently given to strife. And it is not the only way system was stabilized either: some monarchies had regular elections and/or parliaments (Hungary being a good example in that it had both elections and parliament).

And from what we have seen of Planetos, a just system is inherently impossible - unless everyone gets turned into an undead zombie, but even that will not achieve either justice or equality as you'll be ruled by the Others. 

I would have had no fundamental objection to the execution of every adult male noble, when the city was taken.

[Aldarion]

5 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I would have had no fundamental objection to the execution of every adult male noble, when the city was taken.

Same here. But she opted for vengeance instead, and left rest of the noble class basically untouched, allowing them to become a core of the insurrection.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

2 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

Same here. But she opted for vengeance instead, and left rest of the noble class basically untouched, allowing them to become a core of the insurrection.

You know, this kinda brings to mind the various propositions to how to punish the Holocaust

- The Americans and French wanted (and eventually did) individual and fair trials for those deemed guilty

- The Brits and the Soviets just wanted to execute the SS on masse

- Finally Abba Kovner and Nakam just wanted to kill 6 million Germans as retaliation

The first two are both somewhat reasonable. The third is just blood thirsty revenge. And that is what Dany went for.

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

Same here. But she opted for vengeance instead, and left rest of the noble class basically untouched, allowing them to become a core of the insurrection.

In the words of Mike Ehrmentraut “I chose a half-measure, when I should have gone all the way.”

[Alyn Oakenfist]

2 minutes ago, SeanF said:

In the words of Mike Ehrmentraut “I chose a half-measure, when I should have gone all the way.”

You know, the backstory for that particular quote works particularly well in this case, as the abusive husband was not stopped by the half measure, but in fact escalated, killing his wife, kinda like the slavers became far worse after Dany took over

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

You know, this kinda brings to mind the various propositions to how to punish the Holocaust

- The Americans and French wanted (and eventually did) individual and fair trials for those deemed guilty

- The Brits and the Soviets just wanted to execute the SS on masse

- Finally Abba Kovner and Nakam just wanted to kill 6 million Germans as retaliation

The first two are both somewhat reasonable. The third is just blood thirsty revenge. And that is what Dany went for.

The equivalent to the third option would be Dany killing women, children and freedmen.  

[Alyn Oakenfist]

Just now, SeanF said:

The equivalent to the third option would be Dany killing women, children and freedmen.  

You missed the point. Kovner, like Dany, was not particularly interested in justice or guilt, but rather in killing the same number of people as had been killed

[SeanF]

33 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

You missed the point. Kovner, like Dany, was not particularly interested in justice or guilt, but rather in killing the same number of people as had been killed

An eye for an eye has been considered just by many societies, certainly in Martin’s world.  A slave child’s life is being shown as the equivalent to a Great Master’s. I really think if there were Great Masters shouting “Not in my name!  Spare these children!” this would have come up in the story.

To continue the Post War analogy, at Dachau, the camp guards were summarily shot and bludgeoned to death by US GI’s and prisoners.  Elsewhere, some camp guards got off scot-free.  One could say that was unjust, but it does not make the fate of the former undeserved.

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

3 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

No there is none, but the two Unsullied were poisoned in his shop. And noone else was arrested, means either noone else was /there or they're protecting someone.

  The poisoning doesn’t mean that they were guilty. Especially after seeing how smart the Harpy is, that smart that makes Dany confessing to her all of her plan.

3 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

And it's also hilarious how people imagine the daughter/s as little kids.

Can you prove they were not?  ] What we know is that they were staying at home, which means that they were not married. A simple merchant would have married his daughters off and they wouldn’t have been arrested with him and if they were not children and were guilty they wouldn't need to be tortured for their father to break, they would need to break. 

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

  The poisoning doesn’t mean that they were guilty. Especially after seeing how smart the Harpy is, that smart that makes Dany confessing to her all of her plan.

Can you prove they were not?  ] What we know is that they were staying at home, which means that they were not married. A simple merchant would have married his daughters off and they wouldn’t have been arrested with him and if they were not children and were guilty they wouldn't need to be tortured for their father to break, they would need to break. 

My principal objection to Dany's order in this case is that they were small fry (unlike the Great Masters).  Even if they were guilty, we know full well that the Sons of the Harpy have no compunction in threatening people (like Hizdahr's confectioner) with dire punishments if they won't assist them.

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

16 minutes ago, SeanF said:

My principal objection to Dany's order in this case is that they were small fry (unlike the Great Masters).  Even if they were guilty, we know full well that the Sons of the Harpy have no compunction in threatening people (like Hizdahr's confectioner) with dire punishments if they won't assist them.

In that case Dany acted on a fit of rage and whenever she acts like that she always makes bad choices.