Stannis for King!

[FatR]

Stannis consistently does the right thing.

Ahahahaha. Wait, are you talking about the same filthy hypocrite who thinks that everyone should be loyal to him because he happens to be the younger brother of the man who warhammer-ed his way to the throne, but who has absolutely no loyalty to his older brother, allowing Robert AND Ned to die, instead of risking his own ass by personally confronting Lannisters with the truth of the royal incest, and constantly whining about Robert not rewarding him properly to boot? The man who doesn't even bother to fuck his wife often enough to ensure the all-important (particularly if he's to become king) continuation of his line, just because she's not beautiful?

Stannis is even more of an egotistical shit than his brothers, because at least his brothers do not lie to themselves about that.

[King_Stannis]

Stannis is just Renly without any of the latter's positive qualities, including foresight. He wants power for himself, at any cost. Stannis always can be counted on to make a choice that, in Stannis' eyes, will benefit him most, be it betraying the old dynasty, leaving his older brother to die, shitting on laws and customs of Westeros by introducing the policy of religious intolerance, killing his younger brother, burning his nephew alive, and so on. He is a competent, if not brilliant, military commander, but abysmal ruler and politician, who only gets anywhere because of his councilors.

After reading that I really have to wonder if you've read the books themselves, or just some random comments about the books, and Stannis in particular.

Three major characters in this series are almost universally acknowledged for their honesty and honor. As much as a character can be in this series, these are extremely moral characters. They are Ned Stark, Jon Snow and Davos Seaworth. Every one of those characters supports or supported Stannis' cause.

And dude, you need to reread Storm of Swords, particular Davos chapters. He agonized over what to do about Edric Storm, never ultimately deciding, despite your rhetoric about "burning him alive". Then when Davos spirited ES away, Stannis did not cut Davos down, he listened to him about saving the freaking realm.

Really dude? Killing his younger brother? His younger brother deserved to have his head on a spike, Renly is the most rotten, the most selfish character in the series. Religious intolerence? Is Stannis putting anyone not of the God of Light to the sword for only that reason?

[King_Stannis]

Ahahahaha. Wait, are you talking about the same filthy hypocrite who thinks that everyone should be loyal to him because he happens to be the younger brother of the man who warhammer-ed his way to the throne, but who has absolutely no loyalty to his older brother, allowing Robert AND Ned to die, instead of risking his own ass by personally confronting Lannisters with the truth of the royal incest, and constantly whining about Robert not rewarding him properly to boot? The man who doesn't even bother to fuck his wife often enough to ensure the all-important (particularly if he's to become king) continuation of his line, just because she's not beautiful?

Stannis is even more of an egotistical shit than his brothers, because at least his brothers do not lie to themselves about that.

Essentially your argument is that Stannis isn't a good guy because he didn't commit suicide by telling the Lannisters in person.

Uhh, yea, guilty as charged, I suppose.

That part about him and his wife is speculation. There is enough evidence to say that Selyse can't have any more children, the talk of Robert's curse on their wedding night. If the problem was him not trying, that would have been brouched somehow.

And then the all-important whining. :rolleyes: What one does behind closed doors is their business. He felt his honor was pricked by being passed over, and from the way Martin wrote it, he was right to feel that way. It was a surprise he didn't get the lands he almost starved on so his brother could win the iron throne. If that's your best argument against Stannis, I'm even more sure that he's the one who's best for the job.

Filthy hypocrite with no loyalty to his brother? Good grief.

[Kate Poem]

Essentially your argument is that Stannis isn't a good guy because he didn't commit suicide by telling the Lannisters in person.

Uhh, yea, guilty as charged, I suppose.

That part about him and his wife is speculation. There is enough evidence to say that Selyse can't have any more children, the talk of Robert's curse on their wedding night. If the problem was him not trying, that would have been brouched somehow.

And then the all-important whining. :rolleyes: What one does behind closed doors is their business. He felt his honor was pricked by being passed over, and from the way Martin wrote it, he was right to feel that way. It was a surprise he didn't get the lands he almost starved on so his brother could win the iron throne. If that's your best argument against Stannis, I'm even more sure that he's the one who's best for the job.

Filthy hypocrite with no loyalty to his brother? Good grief.

:D I agree with Your every word, "Your Grace". :P

[King_Stannis]

4. King Stannis was'nt happy after Renly's death. He was thinking about it very often. He wanted Renly's bended knee. He offered him a title of his heir.

5. For Renly kiling Stannis was some kind of joke.

Great points all, particularly the ones above. His speech about the peach, and remembering Renly in SoS. His lament that if only Renly had done his brotherly duty the Lannisters would have been smashed. But of course to the Stannis haters all of that is meaningless, the fact that he is Robert's heir is some sort of grey area.

And yeah, Renly thought it was all a big joke. Hahaha, screwing your brother's rightful claim to the throne just because you want it for yourself. Very Funny. I only wish Mel's shadow would have taken longer to kill him. It should have been by inches.

[Bastard of Varys]

Varys said it best I think : "There is no creature on earth half so terrifying as a truly just man."

:agree:

Stannis is a hardass dictator who would impose his own interpretation of fairness across the land. He is a fundamentalist jihadist with a strong sense of duty. He will purge the Seven Kingdoms of people who would dare challenge his plans. He is a Robespierre with a Bin Laden complex, which makes him the perfect monarch when the humans are under siege from the Others.

He will bring peace and unity albeit by force ... until he eventually gets overthrown. Because leaders like him are the best option only in times of chaos. Once peace is restored, the people will find better options, and they will find a way to get rid of him. It is known.

[Michael Stephen Bell Jr.]

1. Joffrey Waters was'nt the king in any way. He was son of Cersei Lannister and her brother Jaime.

2. Mad King wanted them both dead.

3. Then I am rigt. Renly wanted to be king and "fuck my stupid brother. I'll be very nice and I'll save integrity of his dead body... Yes, I am wonderful king.Ha ha ha."

4. King Stannis was'nt happy after Renly's death. He was thinking about it very often. He wanted Renly's bended knee. He offered him a title of his heir.

5. For Renly kiling Stannis was some kind of joke.

6. He did'nt believe in true of Cersei's children, but he disrespected his older brother's marriage and spat in his niece's face. Why?

7. He had'nt any feelings for "boring, annoying etc. etc." Stannis.

8. "Stannis solved no moral issue nor did his methods appeal to any sense of justice"

I disagree.

9. Stannis will be tyrant? Davos Seaworth could be dead after Edric's escape and earlier. He was completely devoted to his king and what the king demanded from his Hand ALL THE TIME? "Be sincere, tell me true, don't lie.". Tyrant? Be faithful, serve well and you'll be safe. Nothing more, nothing less.

Your argument is all over the place.

1) Stannis believed that Joffery wasn't a rightful king based on what evidence? That the kids didn't *look* like Robert. Well that certainly is definitive. Turns out he happened to be right but his evidence for making this determination is no more solid for it being true, and it comes across as merely an argument of convenience.

2) Aerys wanting them dead is within his kingly "rights" apparently. He wants you dead and you are required to sacrifice your life for your king, and if you fail to do so and decide to fight back you are therefore a traitor. More on this later.

3) Then you are right about what? Renly was no more morally correct on this matter than Stannis, he just wasn't a hypocrite. He openly acknowledged what makes a king in Westeros, power.

4) Stannis not being happy about killing Renly does nothing to lessen the fact that he did murder him in an attempt to gain power. If I killed someone I could hardly expect the criminal courts to let me off with a "But I felt really bad about it!"

5)I think that is a bit of an overstatement, but even if it was so what? I am not arguing that Renly had the moral high ground, I am arguing that Stannis didn't. Big difference.

6) Not pertinent to the discussion, but they were both being douchie to each other and Renly out douchied him. Stannis ended up with the last word as you recall. :P

7) Renly didn't like Stannis. He says this openly. What is your point?

8) You disagree why? If you and I are having a philosophical argument and we aren't getting anywhere and then you decide to beat me up, the fact that you beat me up doesn't mean that your philosophical point-of-view was correct, it simply means that you could beat me up. Stannis didn't win his argument with Renly on appeals to moral authority or historical precedent, etc., he simply resorted to force.

9) Stannis perhaps started out by being more reasonable and listening to honest counsel, but by the time you coupled his own sense of self-righteousness with possible religious zealotry, and this seemed to go out the window rather quickly. Thus you have Renly's murder (who Davos, Cressen, and no telling who else opposed or would have opposed given the chance)the murder of Courtney Penrose (which Davos opposed) and the possible sacrificing of a child to further his own political ambitions.

Coming back to my main point in all of this though, is that in order to have a decent discussion about Stannis and his quest for the throne we must have a pretty clear view as to what constitutes "rights" to claim a throne. This tends to be highly inconsistent in the book and in arguments about the book I feel.

For instance you point out that Aerys wanted Ned and Robert dead with the implication that they had to right to fight back. But on what basis do they have the right to fight back? If the king has a divine right to rule then he could within his rights claim a subject's life and the subject would have no say in the matter. If the king is only king by consent of the governed then once they remove their consent all labels like "traitor" or "usurper" become largely meaningless at least as far as moral indicators go.

Further, Ned and Robert's war was clearly more than defensive as they didn't just protect their lands, they went on the offensive and sought to overthrow the king entirely. Is this the actions of traitors or is it the right of the governed to determine who shall govern them no longer? I would argue neither, and that it is merely men with swords killing men with other swords while using rhetoric to justify their actions and sway others to their cause. Such was Renly's position and I feel he was correct.

[Kate Poem]

He has strong sense of duty, but he is'nt jihadist or Robespierre or Bin Laden or hardass dictator.

No. For example: Davos Seaworth was'nt beheaded after Eric's escape or earlier, when he told his liege true many times.

Davos was'nt worshipper of Light Lord too and nothing happened.

Mel said nothing, when ser Davos Seaworth become Lord and Hand of the King.

The reason? Maybe king Stannis trusted Davos Seaworth, believed in his words and motives of doings.

Maybe king Stannis knew Davos Seaworth is one of his little band of men and he did'nt want lose any wassal.

Both of them are believable.

Both of them are'nt bad.

[King_Stannis]

:agree:

Stannis is a hardass dictator who would impose his own interpretation of fairness across the land. He is a fundamentalist jihadist with a strong sense of duty. He will purge the Seven Kingdoms of people who would dare challenge his plans. He is a Robespierre with a Bin Laden complex, which makes him the perfect monarch when the humans are under siege from the Others.

He will bring peace and unity albeit by force ... until he eventually gets overthrown. Because leaders like him are the best option only in times of chaos. Once peace is restored, the people will find better options, and they will find a way to get rid of him. It is known.

For you to believe that, you would need to say that Ned, Davos and Jon are themselves evil and/or stupid. That's something I don't buy, and I don't think Martin is intending that, either. As far as I can tell, the only ones who are very afraid of Stannis getting the Iron Throne are the Lannisters. If you listen it's usually one of them that says "oh, everybody hates Stannis".

Funny you mention that "peace and unity by force", yet he wouldn't take Florent's advice to raze Celtigar and slaughter its inhabitants for betraying Stannis' cause after the failed assault on King's Landing. He named that plan cowardice and evil, just as Davos did. But hey, don't let any actual proof of how Stannis has acted stop you in your ramblings about how you think he would act.

[Vale Nutria]

I like Stannis a lot, one of my favourite characters, but I do think he'd make a bad king. He's too convinced that he's right, and has this intense consequentialist attitude where he is convinced that, no matter what terrible things he does, history will forgive him once he becomes king (and, of course, he KNOWS he will become king, it's not a question of if). He's like a freight train, barreling toward his destination without regard for what gets in the way. Fascinating to read about, but no, if he does end up on the throne people WILL remember what preceded his coronation. Besides, he's far too rigid to make a good king anyway, hurting even those loyal to him.

[King_Stannis]

I like Stannis a lot, one of my favourite characters, but I do think he'd make a bad king. He's too convinced that he's right, and has this intense consequentialist attitude where he is convinced that, no matter what terrible things he does, history will forgive him once he becomes king (and, of course, he KNOWS he will become king, it's not a question of if). He's like a freight train, barreling toward his destination without regard for what gets in the way. Fascinating to read about, but no, if he does end up on the throne people WILL remember what preceded his coronation. Besides, he's far too rigid to make a good king anyway, hurting even those loyal to him.

I'm glad you like the character. As for people remembering what preceded his coronation, do you refer to the fact that he was the only contender for the throne to go to the Wall and help save the land? Indeed, instead of brooding until he was beseiged he listend to Davos, showing a remarkable ability for self diagnosis. He told it to Jon, I think, when he said that his Onion Knight told it right to him, that he wanted to originally win the kingdom so he could save his people, not thinking that he first had to save his people to win the kingdom. That's proof he's far from the "freight train" you describe him as, would you not agree?

[Kate Poem]

All Baratheon children years after years had black hair and blue eyes.

Male Baratheon married female Lannister, Female Baratheon married male Lannister - every child had black hair and blue eyes.

All Robert's bastards had black hair and blue eyes: Gendry, Edric, Mya, Barra etc. etc.

Baratheon's genes are probably very strong.

I am curious: why Jon Arryn believed in suspicions of Stannis? Maybe had some reasons trust him? Maybe he knew he deserves for trust, because he was'nt and he is'nt a liar, never?

Do someone remember words of Night Watch's blacksmith about Renly?

Who enjoyed, when Renly and Stannis atacked each other, when Renly did'nt bend his knee? Lannisters.

Who was afraid of Stannis? Lannisters.

Littlefinger wanted Joffrey on the Throne or maybe Renly, why?

Because he could lose all power and end on the Wall or without head with King Stannis in King's Landing.

What did King Stannis, when his own men raped wild women?

Which king went with help on the Wall?

Who believed in rights of Stannis?

Never mind. I am tired.

[FatR]

Three major characters in this series are almost universally acknowledged for their honesty and honor. As much as a character can be in this series, these are extremely moral characters. They are Ned Stark, Jon Snow and Davos Seaworth. Every one of those characters supports or supported Stannis' cause.

The short answer to this is no, and the long answer is hell no. Barristan Selmy is probably the only character who is universally - and by this I mean not only by people on his side, lying liars, and people who stand to gain something from flattering him - acknowledged as a paragon of honor and morality. Stannis' honor is only recognized when people like Varys and LF try to damn him with a faint praise (as to avoid immediately antagonizing Eddard).

And dude, you need to reread Storm of Swords, particular Davos chapters. He agonized over what to do about Edric Storm, never ultimately deciding, despite your rhetoric about "burning him alive".

He agonized over betraying Targs or killing his brother too, and still did it. "Burning him alive" is not my rhetoric. It is his intention.

Then when Davos spirited ES away, Stannis did not cut Davos down, he listened to him about saving the freaking realm.

His relationship with Davos is actually Stannis' only redeeming trait. But "saving the realm"? Gimme a break. Stannis is only in the north because it gives him a chance to recover his strength for a new bout of civil war, as proven by now.

Really dude? Killing his younger brother? His younger brother deserved to have his head on a spike, Renly is the most rotten, the most selfish character in the series.

This honor goes to both of his older brothers, and even then, after LF, Tywin and probably a bunch of lesser characters. Unlike Stannis (or Robert, really), Renly demonstrates at least some ability to do things he doesn't want to, if it serves his overall goal.

Religious intolerence? Is Stannis putting anyone not of the God of Light to the sword for only that reason?

Actually he burned people for only that reason. Before his position grew so tenous that Melisandre and his queen were forced to tone it down.

[Bastard of Varys]

But hey, don't let any actual proof of how Stannis has acted stop you in your ramblings about how you think he would act.

Oh, no, it won't.

[FatR]

Essentially your argument is that Stannis isn't a good guy because he didn't commit suicide by telling the Lannisters in person.

Suicide? Queen Cersei was completely isolated in the capital, with no Lannisters men on the council (Pycelle was most likely in Littlefinger's pocket) or otherwise anywhere near real power and only 50 men of her guard, in the city where her house was disliked. Her authority entirely depended on a whim of her husband, who didn't even like her and probably would have been glad to get rid of her. She only managed to kill Robert because everyone kept Robert in the dark about the danger, and she only managed to overthrow Eddard because Robert was dead and no one wanted Stannis on the throne. Assuming Stannis makes his move while Robert is still alive... he has to fear Tywin hiring assassins to kill him in revenge, of course, but casting Cersei down would have been down quite easy.

And more importantly, had Stannis actually been honorable, such risk calculations would have been alien to him. He owes the same unquestioning loyalty to Robert, which he demands from everyone in Westeros, by the same principle. He should act on his knowledge or be revealed as a hypocrite he is.

That part about him and his wife is speculation. There is enough evidence to say that Selyse can't have any more children, the talk of Robert's curse on their wedding night. If the problem was him not trying, that would have been brouched somehow.

And it was. He was said to sleep with Selyse no more than once in a year. Also, it is funny how you consider superstitious talk of curses as "evidence".

And then the all-important whining. :rolleyes: What one does behind closed doors is their business. He felt his honor was pricked by being passed over, and from the way Martin wrote it, he was right to feel that way.

No, he wasn't. I see you're mistaking honor for a sense of entitlement. Well, no wonder then you're considering Stannis honorable.

But, as you mentioned that, that's another illustration of Stannis' thorough hypocrisy and childish petulance. Robert granted him the richest reward he could give without robbing his own heirs: the crown prince seat and enough lands to start a new house. Renly legally got only the seat on the Small Council; Baratheon lands were to be inherited by Robert's kids. That Renly managed to win loyalty of the vassals of his house and Stannis didn't, was purely Stannis' fault. For which he blamed Robert. Even though his own supposed principles should have dictated him to shut up, serve and accept whatever rewards Robert sees fit to give him, because Robert is his lawful king.

[King_Stannis]

But "saving the realm"? Gimme a break. Stannis is only in the north because it gives him a chance to recover his strength for a new bout of civil war, as proven by now.

Yeah, it's not like the wildings had a horn that could bring the wall down or anything, leaving the land bare for blue eyed, black handed undead to come frolic at will. :rolleyes:

Of course if Stannis hadn't gone and that happened we'd probably get a bunch of whiny posts on how Stannis just sat on his ass. Damned if you do and damned if you don't I guess, as well as no good deed going unpunished.

Actually he burned people for only that reason. Before his position grew so tenous that Melisandre and his queen were forced to tone it down.

You're going to have to cite that for me, my man. I don't recall Stannis burning anyone on the grounds they didn't follow the God of Light.

[King_Stannis]

No, he wasn't. I see you're mistaking honor for a sense of entitlement. Well, no wonder then you're considering Stannis honorable.

But, as you mentioned that, that's another illustration of Stannis' thorough hypocrisy and childish petulance. Robert granted him the richest reward he could give without robbing his own heirs: the crown prince seat and enough lands to start a new house. Renly legally got only the seat on the Small Council; Baratheon lands were to be inherited by Robert's kids. That Renly managed to win loyalty of the vassals of his house and Stannis didn't, was purely Stannis' fault. For which he blamed Robert. Even though his own supposed principles should have dictated him to shut up, serve and accept whatever rewards Robert sees fit to give him, because Robert is his lawful king.

It's noted several times in the book that the people were surprised Stannis was passed over. Robert may have had his reasons, but Stannis had grounds for private complaint. Yet he still took Dragonstone, took his place on the council, and did his duty.

The short answer to this is no, and the long answer is hell no. Barristan Selmy is probably the only character who is universally - and by this I mean not only by people on his side, lying liars, and people who stand to gain something from flattering him - acknowledged as a paragon of honor and morality. Stannis' honor is only recognized when people like Varys and LF try to damn him with a faint praise (as to avoid immediately antagonizing Eddard).

Great, you think Selmy is perfect. Good for you, I can point to a bunch of minor characters that aren't that fleshed out and assign them perfection, too. We're talking major characters here, Ned, Jon and Davos. All three are very positively received, pretty honorable and fairly smart (though not ruthlessly cunning, that honor goes to the enemies of Stannis). Again, all three of those MAJOR characters support or supported Stannis' claim.

[King_Stannis]

9) Stannis perhaps started out by being more reasonable and listening to honest counsel, but by the time you coupled his own sense of self-righteousness with possible religious zealotry, and this seemed to go out the window rather quickly. Thus you have Renly's murder (who Davos, Cressen, and no telling who else opposed or would have opposed given the chance)the murder of Courtney Penrose (which Davos opposed) and the possible sacrificing of a child to further his own political ambitions.

I disagree with many of your points, but I think you at least thought them out fairly well. I take issue with the "religious zealotry" you mention above. Time and time again in the books Stannis is portrayed as not being particulary religious, though he does allow Melisandre to operate more or less unhindered. Look at how he himself describes "Lightbringer" in SoS, and you will see he views all of this with a skeptical eye. His line to his wife "this is not one of your nightfires".

It's almost like he knows he should be king by the current law of succession (he's right on there), but has to be convinced he is AA reborn.

I don't think Stannis could be considered a religious zealot.

And careful about that "possible" sacrificing of ES. He didn't do it. He was thinking about the age old conundrum of one life for millions, but he hadn't made up his mind completely. As far as I know the only character who has sacrificed someone solely to gain some sort of supernatural power is Danaerys and her murder of the witch woman. You can say Stannis "murdered" Renly, but it was really just an execution. Renly's life was forfeit the moment he knew the truth about Joffrey's lineage and still decided to usurp the throne for himself. Whether it was done on the field of battle, by a headsman’s axe, or by a shadow it really doesn’t matter. And honestly, when was the last time you read of anyone in the books lamenting Renly Baratheon? The guy was a selfish chump and was rightly executed as a usurper. Thankfully, too. It saved countless lives on both sides at the time.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

As far as I know the only character who has sacrificed someone solely to gain some sort of supernatural power is Danaerys and her murder of the witch woman.

MMD was also burnt as punishment for murdering Daenerys unborn son, not only to wake Dragons.

But else-wise, carry on with your stalwart and lonely Stannis-defense! I support you. :)

[JKeats]

Others in this thread have done a fine job of defending Stan the Man, so I'll keep my head low for now.

But I would like to point out one thing with respect to Edric Storm. Stannis threatened to kill Melisandre herself if she mislead him over Edric.

"'I like this no more than you do, but my duty is to the realm. My duty...' He turned back to Melisandre. 'You swear there is no other way? Swear it on your life, for I promise, you shall die by inches if you lie.'"

--Davis 6, ASoS

Look, when Stannis promises to kill Mel herself, I think we can take it to mean he is really taking the Edric situation very seriously. He is not some monster who burns children for fun and profit.