Jump to content

Victims of Stark Justice: Gared, Janos, and Dareon


James West

Recommended Posts

I'm pretty sure this is just another Stark hate thread, or at least a attempt to one but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

2 hours ago, James West said:

1.   Ned Stark beheads a deserter from the Night's Watch who was suffering from PTSD.  The man had an important message.  Unfortunately, the Starks did not take the man seriously and promptly kills him.  How different might the story be if the man's warning was taken seriously.  Westeros would have been better prepared for what is coming.  

The first part of your first sentence is the important part here. He is a deserter, penalty for deserting is death, it does not matter the reason, he deserted there for he forfeited the rigth to life in this universe. Furthermore Ned action are backed by Benjen who does say that somethong is going on past the Wall but he does not know what. Saying that Ned should have listen to a man basically pleading for is life and most likely to say anything to save it is just stupid (and from what I remember it is not how we are presented with the fact in the books but in the Show). So Ned was in is full rigth and any other lord would have done the same.

2 hours ago, James West said:

2.  Ned's bastard, the lord commander at the Night's Watch, Jon Snow, beheads Janos Slynt.  Janos was a rude man who was initially resistant to go on a suicide mission given to him by Lord Commander Jon Snow.  The execution was a set up.  Jon Snow orchestrated the situation knowing that Janos would most likely resist and thus give him an opportunity to kill the man who was an enemy of his father, Ned Stark.  Read the scene carefully and it is clear that Janos finally agreed to go.  Jon had made his point and already gave a demonstration of breaking the man in public.  Still, Jon convinced himself, made up excuses, to justify what he wanted to do: murder Janos Slynt.  The killing divided the Night's Watch.  Jon put the fear in those who could have given him constructive criticism.  

Again the first part is important, Jon is the Lord commander of the nigth watch, wich means he has the rigth of life and death over every member of the watch, including Slynt. Slynt was not sent on a suicide mission, tho you could argue that Thorne was, he was given command of a outpost, so a place of leadership for a guy that is been in the watch for what ? A couple of months ? So far from a suicide mission he give Slynt a commanding role that he rudely and publicly refused. Jon gived him a chance to back off and go but he refused, this public disobedience in a military order is treason and their for is punished by death. Sure not alway and some leanience is most of the time given but here two things go against Slynt, first Jon is knew, young and somewhat contested, if he backs down at the first conflict is leadership is as good as dead so harsh punishement send the message that he migth be young but he is not a pushover, and add to that the fact that Slynt is one of the reason is father is dead, well that is just a bonus. So Slynt execution is justified by the laws of the watch, sure it is a harsh and to the letter interpretation of them but still it is justified.

2 hours ago, James West said:

3.  Arya Stark murders Dareon.  Without hearing Dareon's story, without giving the boy a chance to speak for himself, Arya murders him.  Will knowing the boy's sad story change Arya's mind?  Probably not.  Arya Stark has no idea what true justice is.  She is acting on emotion, hate and silent anger.  

I will give that one to you, what Arya does is unjust and unwarrented, sure Daeron is a dick and a deserter but he is out of Westeros so the laws of Westeros dont apply. His story is tragic, but only if it is true, after all we only have is version, and im not sure he would just go "Yeah I tried to rape the daugther of a lord" to people if that was the truth, im inclined to believe him but it is not a absolute truth, and the way he then treats Sam and Aemon is very dickish, but again not to the point of deserving death. But we are talking about Arya, I dont think they're is a more broken character in the series then her, she at the age of 11 seen as much murder and rape then a WW2 red army veteran, she is going to be completely fucked up. Since she as been seperated from her family murder has been her most effective tool to survive, so it would be her go to reaction if somebody wronged her or the last family she has. So Yeah Daeron's murder was that, a murder but I can see why she did it.

2 hours ago, James West said:

It is no wonder that many here are saying the Starks deserved to fall.  

So to recap, 1 was justified and a normal legal action, 2 was a harsh but still legal and logical action and 3 was a murder for sure but from a rogue completely traumatised little girl who as seen more shit that (I hope) we will ever see in our life times.

Yeah hard disagree on the deserved fall, especially since 2 and 3 are consequence of that fall more then causes of them. Slynt would be at the watch if he sided with Ned and even if he ended at the Wall Jon would have anything against him making it so is execution would be a harder choise for him, and Arya would even be in Braavos if her family had not been murdered, her forced to flee and go thrue a actual war zone in hopes to find her family only to find them the moment they are being massacred.

If anything the Stark becoming more and more ruthless and savage is a consequence of they're fall, they played honorably and by the rules, and they got destroyed, but now Winter is Coming and the Starks come with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, James West said:

1.   Ned Stark beheads a deserter from the Night's Watch who was suffering from PTSD.  The man had an important message.  Unfortunately, the Starks did not take the man seriously and promptly kills him.  How different might the story be if the man's warning was taken seriously.  Westeros would have been better prepared for what is coming.  

2.  Ned's bastard, the lord commander at the Night's Watch, Jon Snow, beheads Janos Slynt.  Janos was a rude man who was initially resistant to go on a suicide mission given to him by Lord Commander Jon Snow.  The execution was a set up.  Jon Snow orchestrated the situation knowing that Janos would most likely resist and thus give him an opportunity to kill the man who was an enemy of his father, Ned Stark.  Read the scene carefully and it is clear that Janos finally agreed to go.  Jon had made his point and already gave a demonstration of breaking the man in public.  Still, Jon convinced himself, made up excuses, to justify what he wanted to do: murder Janos Slynt.  The killing divided the Night's Watch.  Jon put the fear in those who could have given him constructive criticism.  

3.  Arya Stark murders Dareon.  Without hearing Dareon's story, without giving the boy a chance to speak for himself, Arya murders him.  Will knowing the boy's sad story change Arya's mind?  Probably not.  Arya Stark has no idea what true justice is.  She is acting on emotion, hate and silent anger.  

It is no wonder that many here are saying the Starks deserved to fall.  

1) hes babbling like a loon and even if he was telling the truth the watch needs its men  to defend the realm thus it needs there to be known consequences to dessertion! 

 

2)for all his crappy qualities janos can read and write , can orgainise  the logistics of running (if not leading well) a large body of men thus he was an asset,.jon gave him a plum.role...he needed another functioning tower up and running with a commander!

Janos refusal to follow orders was punished as any other org or force at that time would , no single lord in westeros can have a bannerman seen to.refuse him, no king can be told no without consequences  nor can the watch afford open mutiny in the ranks.  Jon didnt ask of he wanted to go he gave him an order as his superior in the ranks of the watch, both men knew the consequences of refusal...janos chose to disobey his lord  in spite of vows he swore thus his life was forfeit

 

3)she doesnt need to shes watched him closely hes a desserter and  worse traitor to his brothers in dire  need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, James West said:

1.   Ned Stark beheads a deserter from the Night's Watch who was suffering from PTSD.  The man had an important message.  Unfortunately, the Starks did not take the man seriously and promptly kills him.  How different might the story be if the man's warning was taken seriously.  Westeros would have been better prepared for what is coming.  

2.  Ned's bastard, the lord commander at the Night's Watch, Jon Snow, beheads Janos Slynt.  Janos was a rude man who was initially resistant to go on a suicide mission given to him by Lord Commander Jon Snow.  The execution was a set up.  Jon Snow orchestrated the situation knowing that Janos would most likely resist and thus give him an opportunity to kill the man who was an enemy of his father, Ned Stark.  Read the scene carefully and it is clear that Janos finally agreed to go.  Jon had made his point and already gave a demonstration of breaking the man in public.  Still, Jon convinced himself, made up excuses, to justify what he wanted to do: murder Janos Slynt.  The killing divided the Night's Watch.  Jon put the fear in those who could have given him constructive criticism.  

3.  Arya Stark murders Dareon.  Without hearing Dareon's story, without giving the boy a chance to speak for himself, Arya murders him.  Will knowing the boy's sad story change Arya's mind?  Probably not.  Arya Stark has no idea what true justice is.  She is acting on emotion, hate and silent anger.  

It is no wonder that many here are saying the Starks deserved to fall.  

They deserve to fall. They lack principle and discipline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stark loyalists try to play it down as a minor mistake when it's done by the Starks.  These are really not minor mistakes.  The examples given here are tragic.  It should not be lost on the reader, the three Starks who unjustly beheaded people were all removed from power and killed by the people they led. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rosetta Stone said:

The Stark loyalists try to play it down as a minor mistake when it's done by the Starks.  These are really not minor mistakes.  The examples given here are tragic.  It should not be lost on the reader, the three Starks who unjustly beheaded people were all removed from power and killed by the people they led. 

But Rosetta Stone, I want to hear from Rondo. Do you know what they think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jon Fossoway said:

I don't see a reason for Eddard to take Gared story seriously. The man was blabbing incoherences, among them that 'the Others' were coming.

About Slynt, he was a political antagonist to the Lord Commander and yea, Jon lured him right into a trap and he got a leverage to execute him. Jon is allowed to play politics too.

Arya is 11 years old'ish, for Rahloo's sake.

You will say Red Rahloo’s full name properly or won’t utter it at all! Burn the heathen! Burn the Starks too while at it. And some Tullys too just for flavor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Rosetta Stone said:

The Stark loyalists try to play it down as a minor mistake when it's done by the Starks.  These are really not minor mistakes.  The examples given here are tragic.  It should not be lost on the reader, the three Starks who unjustly beheaded people were all removed from power and killed by the people they led. 

Dude just how many accounts do you have? Or are you guys really all seperate individuals that are members of a racial supremacist cult that endorses and tries to promote incest? Because TargAryans are just that, sister fucking racial supremacists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

I count 37 but more are made all the time.

Gotta love how the moderation works. My threads that have a valid basis for discussion depending on the material we got gets locked down while these baseless hate threads with multiple accounts face no such consequences at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Dude just how many accounts do you have? Or are you guys really all seperate individuals that are members of a racial supremacist cult that endorses and tries to promote incest? Because TargAryans are just that, sister fucking racial supremacists.

Reality denying, don’t forget that. And again, these are the TARGAs and should never ever be confused w/ intelligent & insightful Dany fans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Gotta love how the moderation works. My threads that have a valid basis for discussion depending on the material we got gets locked down while these baseless hate threads with multiple accounts face no such consequences at all.

Perhaps these boring af Stark hate threads haven’t been reported whereas yours have? I’ve no idea. Mods aren’t constantly online reading every single post or thread. But when something is reported, they check it out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Perhaps these boring af Stark hate threads haven’t been reported whereas yours have? I’ve no idea. Mods aren’t constantly online reading every single post or thread. But when something is reported, they check it out. 

Good call we should report these every time one pops out then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Craving Peaches said:

Thing is, do you have to give a reason for the report? Because I would say 'suspected alternate/bot account' but I've heard that this issue has already been investigated.

You may give a reason, but I don't think it's a sine qua non requirement. I could be wrong. but more importantly I think it's always best to provide as much info as possible when filing a report like this.

As to it having been looked into already, are we sure about that? Furthermore, I know I'm alone on this, but if the report complained about these being sock puppets... well, maybe that complaint was investigated and they reached the conclusion that they're not, that these are indeed separate accounts. 

I don't know the answer. I think there's a combination of trolling and true believing, and it's a lot worse now after the abomination. It just makes everything kind of boring and predictable. And I know I don't do it, but whoever said upthread that the best thing is to just ignore all of these accounts is spot on. Leave them talking to themselves and just ignore all of them, because they won't change their views or behaviour, and by replying we're just encouraging more of the same. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

After? More like before, during and after all the while molesting the queen’s ladies in waiting with one hand and  throwing around pots of wildfire with the other

Hey, I was only trying to make Aerys not sound like a completely reprehensible, irredeemable lunatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...