Jump to content

“Monsters” that really did nothing wrong.


KingEuronGreyjoy
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Theon Stark did exactly one thing wrong, he should’ve finished the job he started wiped out the Filth of the Seven from Planetos. 

So it's not okay for the Andals to forcefully convert people to the FotS, but the First Men are allowed to kill all the people of one religious group because?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, KingEuronGreyjoy said:

Theon Stark did nothing wrong. Andals had it coming.

Have to disagree. Two wrongs don't make a right. Given that the Andals he massacred were still living in Andalos, it is unlikely they were involved in the attacks and raiding on the North. Especially since he targeted villages, he was likely killing civillians, not the warriors.

Also, can you really claim the entire group of people 'had it coming' for the actions of only some of its members? All the innocent Andals who lead peaceful lives deserve to be slaughtered just because some of them fought the First Men?

Finally, if the Andals had it coming for what they did to the First Men, the First Men had it coming for what they did to the Children of the Forest and the Giants, and the Targaryens had it coming for what they did to the people of Westeros.

Edited by Craving Peaches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

So his genocide is allowed because it's a 'preemptive strike'? And what did his 'failure' to slaughter an entire religious/ethnic group lead to?

The almost complete genocide of the Children. Thousands to millions of deaths from Andal Holy Wars. The Faith Militant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theon ast

55 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Theon Stark did exactly one thing wrong, he should’ve finished the job he started wiped out the Filth of the Seven from Planetos. 

It’s like General Sherman from the American Civil War. The only thing he did wrong was stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, KingEuronGreyjoy said:

The almost complete genocide of the Children.

Which the first men started ages before.

27 minutes ago, KingEuronGreyjoy said:

Thousands to millions of deaths from Andal Holy Wars. The Faith Militant.

Either way there is thousands to millions of deaths. Or does him slaughtering the Andals just not count? Wars happened before the Andals came. The First Men aren't any different. When they invaded Westeros they slaughtered the Children of the Forest and the Giants.

Also, if the Andals don't move to Westeros, they are enslaved/exterminated by the Valyrians.

Edited by Craving Peaches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

If the Andals had it coming for what they did to the First Men, the First Men had it coming for what they did to the Children of the Forest and the Giants, and the Targaryens had it coming for what they did to the people of Westeros.

This is why I kind of want the Others to win.

Also, on the First Men note, Robar Royce was a hero for trying to drive the Andals out of the Vale.

Edited by Canon Claude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Which the first men started ages before.

Either way there is thousands to millions of deaths. Or does him slaughtering the Andals just not count? Wars happened before the Andals came. The First Men aren't any different. When they invaded Westeros they slaughtered the Children of the Forest and the Giants.

And then stopped, and lived in peace with them for thousands of years. Andals didn’t stop due to any treaty, they stopped because the Children were so few in number and they ran and hid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

So his genocide is allowed because it's a 'preemptive strike'? And what did his 'failure' to slaughter an entire religious/ethnic group lead to?

That said violent groups aggression to his lands and lands of his kinsmen, the First Men of Westeros. Most importantly the world stagnating for several milennia. Westeros had planetos' first university and yet the Planetos is very stagnant. Why? Because of the oppressive boy diddling clergy of the Falsehoods of the Seven. Westeros could've been the shining beacon in the west and these savages who carve stars upon their bodies and rocks have took that.

Edited by Corvo the Crow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

That said violent groups aggression to his lands and lands of his kinsmen, the First Men of Westeros. Most importantly the world stagnating for several milennia. Westeros had planetos' first university and yet the Planetos is very stagnant. Why? Because of the oppressive boy diddling clergy of the Falsehoods of the Seven. Westeros could've been the shining beacon in the west and these savages who carve stars upon their bodies and rocks have took that.

the faith does not appear to bring out the best in the maesters that much is true

they appear to lack any thirst for knowledge of their own and they love power

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Why? Because of the oppressive boy diddling clergy of the Falsehoods of the Seven. Westeros could've been the shining beacon in the west and these savages who carve stars upon their bodies and rocks have took that.

There was still a large gap between the founding of the citadel and the coming of the Andals where the First Men made no progress. They came with bronze and stuck with it up until the Andals arrived. No innovation. Also, no one in the book thinks technology is stagnant, and no one is blaming the Faith for lack of progress.

And I fail to see how this justifies genocide, even if it is true. I've already mentioned all the innocent Andals but it seems either you don't care, view them as acceptable collateral damage or believe there are no innocent Andals.

Edited by Craving Peaches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm kind of focusing more on the word 'monster' than on the deeds of someone history determines to be a monster which I understand is probably a little off topic, but I do wonder what Cold Hands was specifically referring to when he called himself Bran's monster. Was it just being a zombie - which definitely fits my definition or was it something else which perhaps ties him to some of the other 'monsters' in the story?

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...