Opinions on the dragons?

[Ivan Tsarevich]

3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

"Minority Report" is a movie, not an actual report.

Ah. Here I started thinking (after posting) that it might be a newspaper/media outlet/something. Thanks for correction.

6 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG7DGMgfOb8&ab_channel=MovieclipsClassicTrailers

Thank you.

[SeanF]

16 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I mean quite a lot of people name 16 as the age when someone is "a man grown".

I can remember a few threads back in the day where people would express the hope that Sansa would poison or suffocate Sweetrobin, who is 9, so disgusting did they find him.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

Just now, SeanF said:

I can remember a few threads back in the day where people would express the hope that Sansa would poison or suffocate Sweetrobin, who is 9, so disgusting did they find him.

I mean I can remember a few quite recently, only they don't hope because they hate SR, but rather because they hate Sansa...

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

4 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

The nonsense is so strong in this one even you have trouble explaining it.

@Lilac & Gooseberries, what do you say, is "it's hard to explain" better than "Life and vigor"

Why not both? It’s hard to explain but the life and vigour they have it’s all the explanation you need.

29 minutes ago, SeanF said:

In our world, very few countries align the age of criminal responsibility with the age of majority.

In England and Wales, the age of criminal responsibility is 10.  In much of the US, it’s 6 or 7.  Juveniles are more leniently treated than adults, but Martin’s is a crapsack world.  In medieval England, a 9 year old might have been hanged for theft.  A 13 year old certainly would be.

No one in Martin’s world would hesitate to execute a 13 year felon.

If there was a law to break. That is the centre of what I am saying, they knew nothing better because it was never illegal. They have been raised in a society were slavery was a cultural aspect and if you cannot punish children for something like that before at least you give them the chance to change.

Look it that way, one day a conqueror comes from the land Beyond the Sunset Sea. He has been raised in a society that they consider feudalism equally as bad as genocide and he wants to take actions against it. He orders all Lords from the last of the landed knights to the King over the age of 12 to be killed. Is that a fair thing to do? Is it not evil? Does it solve any problem in the society?

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I mean I can remember a few quite recently, only they don't hope because they hate SR, but rather because they hate Sansa...

A lot of people loathe Sweetrobin.

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

7 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I can remember a few threads back in the day where people would express the hope that Sansa would poison or suffocate Sweetrobin, who is 9, so disgusting did they find him.

What the   ?

 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

4 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

Why not both? It’s hard to explain but the life and vigour they have it’s all the explanation you need.

Also, their live and vigor is hard to explain, it just is, a sign from Rhallo that Dany is Azor Ahai

[Hugorfonics]

11 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

Yes I do agree and as he said  in the Blood of Elves

Word, I was thinking of that quote he gives to Phil about not caring about the war like he doesnt care about the war the alley cats are having a couple blocks away. (Cant remember which book or the full passage) Thing is I strongly disagree with the Witchers neutrality and the continent suffers for it.

15 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

I would say that 16, the age of maturity in Westeros, would had been the right one. Give the children the chance to change. They will be those who will built the new society.

I dont see the correlation of the age of maturity in Westeros and Danys decision. I would argue that 15 year olds are intelligent enough, and large enough, to take charge in a counter revolution. Id also argue that 17 year olds are children. Its tricky. (Like i was totally immature at 17, 6 ft though)

19 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

I understand that. But by killing the children she creates a cycle of blood that has two possible endings. Either go full Tywin and kill the whole family or Dornish rebellion with the family members that are still alive taking their revenge.

I mean we know what happens to the kids 1-12. They died too. Probably. Aspator faces a few more devastations after Dany left a council to oversee it.

But yea she tried to take a gentler hand in Merreen and we seen many freedmen shave their heads to publicly show their willingness to change but we also see many who cling to their ancient beliefs in the terrorist organization of sons of the harpy

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

Why not both? It’s hard to explain but the life and vigour they have it’s all the explanation you need.

If there was a law to break. That is the centre of what I am saying, they knew nothing better because it was never illegal. They have been raised in a society were slavery was a cultural aspect and if you cannot punish children for something like that before at least you give them the chance to change.

Look it that way, one day a conqueror comes from the land Beyond the Sunset Sea. He has been raised in a society that they consider feudalism equally as bad as genocide and he wants to take actions against it. He orders all Lords from the last of the landed knights to the King over the age of 12 to be killed. Is that a fair thing to do? Is it not evil? Does it solve any problem in the society?

Did Joffrey know any better, given his upbringing?  That’s probably too sophisticated an argument for people in this world.

I expect Dany takes the view that people have been treating her as a legitimate target since well below the age of 16, so she’s not going to adopt that age as a cut off point.

[Hugorfonics]

7 minutes ago, SeanF said:

A lot of people loathe Sweetrobin.

Hes pretty fucking weird. 

Quote

"The bad little man," Lord Robert said, giggling. "Mother, can I make him fly? I want to see him fly."

Nuzzling up to his cousins titties and shit

[Rondo]

10 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

The nonsense is so strong in this one even you have trouble explaining it.

@Lilac & Gooseberries, what do you say, is "it's hard to explain" better than "Life and vigor"

 

Now you're being obtuse.  You are looking at the situation from the perspective of 2021.  In Slaver's Bay and Westeros, the value of life was determined by those in power.  The lords called men into battle for whatever cause they deemed worthy.  Their wars killed people, even those who were still in the womb.  The Ghiscari masters were doing the same thing.  They were feeding kids to bears.  Rolling them in honey to make them appetizing.  So there is nothing at all objectionable about a conqueror passing a sentence where 12 and up are judged guilty.  Slaver's Bay make no distinction between children and adults.  Westeros is not all that different.  Death and suffering of children do not dissuade the lords from starting wars.  And dear Ned Stark would have executed Theon if the Greyjoys had rebelled again.  Robert sent an assassin to murder a pregnant 13 year old.  Tywin murdered children for the sins of their parents.  Lords disposed of deformed babies.  Val wants to kill Shireen for being sick.  The decision to hold those slavers above 12 accountable is very fair when taken in comparison.  

[Alyn Oakenfist]

3 minutes ago, Rondo said:

Now you're being obtuse.

Son, you are forgetting yourself. Solitary, a month!

Shawshank references aside, I was merely pointing out that you used the actual argument "it's hard to explain" which really helped your case...

[Dracul's Daughter]

2 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Son, you are forgetting yourself. Solitary, a month!

Shawshank references aside,

Great movie and novel btw.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

2 minutes ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

Great movie and novel btw.

Yeah, really great movie, perfectly cast too.

As for the novel, it's weird, King is best known for his supernatural stuff, yet I find his best writing to be the non supernatural, like Shawshank and Misery.

[Dracul's Daughter]

19 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Yeah, really great movie, perfectly cast too.

As for the novel, it's weird, King is best known for his supernatural stuff, yet I find his best writing to be the non supernatural, like Shawshank and Misery.

I'm also a big fan of King.I loved Misery (both book and movie) and currently I'm at my second reading of "Under the Dome".

And I agree.He is one of the best in describing human behaviour.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

9 minutes ago, Dracul's Daughter said:

I'm also a big fan of King.I loved Misery (both book and movie)

I mean I liked the book.

I have to say barring the miniseries, most of King's works I feel works better adapted, as it evens out the rough edges. Misery in particular, I quite like the transitions from axe to hammer, and from lawnmower to gun. Makes the story more enjoyable, without me having to roll my eyes thinking "Really King? Did you really need to put that in?"

Also the Misery story within story I felt was a bit superfluous, though I will give credit to King, the feeling of claustrophobia in the novel is just great, and I get him needing to create a relief valve without exiting the main POV (like the movie does with the detective)

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

Word, I was thinking of that quote he gives to Phil about not caring about the war like he doesnt care about the war the alley cats are having a couple blocks away. (Cant remember which book or the full passage) Thing is I strongly disagree with the Witchers neutrality and the continent suffers for it.

 

I don't remember which one you mean. But this one

Quote

“is always murder, regardless of motive or circumstance. Thus those who murder or who prepare to murder are malefactors and criminals, regardless of who they may be: kings, princes, marshals or judges. None who contemplates and commits violence has the right to consider himself better than an ordinary criminal. Because it is in the nature of all violence to lead inevitably to crime.”

from the Blood of Elves is really interested and is to the point. No matter where it comes from violence leads to violence.

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

“is always murder, regardless of motive or circumstance. Thus those who murder or who prepare to murder are malefactors and criminals, regardless of who they may be: kings, princes, marshals or judges. None who contemplates and commits violence has the right to consider himself better than an ordinary criminal. Because it is in the nature of all violence to lead inevitably to crime.”

She comes from a culture where the age of maturity is the age of 16  and she wants to enforce the same culture in Essos. Something that is not wrong per se but still that’s the standards she sets. We cannot keep moving the goalposts in order to make excuses about Dany.

1 hour ago, Hugorfonics said:

I mean we know what happens to the kids 1-12. They died too. Probably. Aspator faces a few more devastations after Dany left a council to oversee it.

But yea she tried to take a gentler hand in Merreen and we seen many freedmen shave their heads to publicly show their willingness to change but we also see many who cling to their ancient beliefs in the terrorist organization of sons of the harpy

Can someone really say that the children who died because of Dany worth less than the slaves and they should be killed without being given the chance to change?
 

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

Did Joffrey know any better, given his upbringing?  That’s probably too sophisticated an argument for people in this world.

I expect Dany takes the view that people have been treating her as a legitimate target since well below the age of 16, so she’s not going to adopt that age as a cut off point.

Why is changing the society instead of killing them all is too sophisticated?

[Hugorfonics]

2 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

 

I don't remember which one you mean. But this one

from the Blood of Elves is really interested and is to the point. No matter where it comes from violence leads to violence.

(Time of contempt was the book i was thinking of, when shit hits the fan. Idk how to pull up Witcher quotes like asoiaf plus ive only read like 1/2 of em once) 

Yea thats true too, but I still feel like Geralts wrong. There are levels to crime and worse things then violence.

2 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

She comes from a culture where the age of maturity is the age of 16  

She really doesnt. Dany was raised by Viserys, who although was Westerosi was just a child when he went into exile

2 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

and she wants to enforce the same culture in Essos.

Also not really. Although not a fan of the fighting pits, or the floppy ears, she accepts both.

Danys hatred of slavery is a personal matter

2 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

We cannot keep moving the goalposts in order to make excuses about Dany.

Sure we can  

2 hours ago, Lilac & Gooseberries said:

Can someone really say that the children who died because of Dany worth less than the slaves and they should be killed without being given the chance to change?

Course not and its all depressing stuff. But where I firmly mount my goalpost is on the destruction of the ghiscaris unsullied factory for the past thousands of years thats known as the red bricks of Aspator.

I wasnt happy when Cleon the great was murdered, either time. Not that he was as great as he said, but at the very least im glad a pro Dany government took the reigns of Aspator instead of the other outcome, a reemergence into unsullied slavery. Which honestly could have happend, however the more lined on the wall the less chance it could happen. Horrible stuff, no doubt, but its war for a greater case

[Nathan Stark]

4 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

The nonsense is so strong in this one even you have trouble explaining it.

@Lilac & Gooseberries, what do you say, is "it's hard to explain" better than "Life and vigor"

 

Who knew explaining could be so complicated?

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

51 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

(Time of contempt was the book i was thinking of, when shit hits the fan. Idk how to pull up Witcher quotes like asoiaf plus ive only read like 1/2 of em once) 

Yea thats true too, but I still feel like Geralts wrong. There are levels to crime and worse things then violence.

 

My favourite quote from  The Time of Contempt

Quote

 

“It’s incredible,’ the Witcher smiled hideously, ‘how much my neutrality outrages everybody. How it makes me subject to offers of pacts and agreements, offers of collaboration, lectures about the necessity to make choices and join the right side.

 

 

51 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

She really doesnt. Dany was raised by Viserys, who although was Westerosi was just a child when he went into exile

 

She works by Westerosi standards up to a point.

51 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

 

“It’s incredible,’ the Witcher smiled hideously, ‘how much my neutrality outrages everybody. How it makes me subject to offers of pacts and agreements, offers of collaboration, lectures about the necessity to make choices and join the right side.

 

 I can agree with her hate up to a point but when the reasonable hate becomes genocidal one then I disagree with her. I also think that you first learn and plan and then conquer and rule while she seemed to have done the opposite.

51 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Course not and its all depressing stuff. But where I firmly mount my goalpost is on the destruction of the ghiscaris unsullied factory for the past thousands of years thats known as the red bricks of Aspator.

I wasnt happy when Cleon the great was murdered, either time. Not that he was as great as he said, but at the very least im glad a pro Dany government took the reigns of Aspator instead of the other outcome, a reemergence into unsullied slavery. Which honestly could have happend, however the more lined up at the wall the less chance it could happen. Horrible stuff, no doubt, but its war for a greater case

Then why people react like I am saying the worst thing possible? Why people were like that 12 hours ago? Why people were so ready to choose who to save?