What is Dany's long-term plan for Westeros...

[Lummel]

One thing I noticed reading Dany and Sansa's chapters :

I think Sansa is a good observer. She watches the reality and she applies the informations to improve reasoning skills.

Dany seems to live in another reality to me. She's not stupid, she can be smart, but sometimes she makes me think if is able to see what is in front of her. Her arrogance doesn't help. To corner her in a conversation is easy.

This seems realistic to me. Sansa has the luxury of being able to observe and to think in her own time. Dany doesn't, she has to respond and respond appropriately all the time, and everybody at her court watches her responses and judges them.

We have seen three people ruling so far Cersei, Dany and Jon and all of them fail in their own way. The one thing they have in common is the absence of effective and useful advisors who can challenge them, support them and assist them.

Dany I'd say is in the worst position of all three and this probably has a bearing on the lack of a long term plan for Westeros. The Meereen situation is overwhelmingly negative - its only 'natural resource' is slave trading, inadequate food supplies, no timber, no ships, no easy transport links. Such military assets as she has have the potential to be liabilities - the Dragons, powerful but uncontrollable - the unsullied, great soldiers but require leadership - the Dothraki great cavalry but she's only got a dozen or two of them - the shavepates, devoted to her, but have their own agenda(s) and are untested in battle and so on.

Everything is a problem, much of the book is taken up with dealing with the consequences of problems that she has caused and then being stuck with less and less room to manoever as her decisions further limit her potential actions. And as a result she ends up trapped on a path of compromise to disaster. It's great from a if it can go wrong it will perspective.

And where in all that can she find the space to think effectively about the long term future - well she can't. Her naivety and innocence have crashed her on the rocks of reality. It's a fantastic working out of the Aragorn question - what happens to the person so effective in one type of situation when they are finally required to carry out their destiny and rule?

[Ser Beric]

I think it's probably lucky she doesn't have a long term plan, because she will be needed at the Wall with her dragons to fight the Others. I think Tyrion will play her to get her to the North, knowing the young Ageon is with Griff in the South... He'll want Cersei fighting two fronts.

But morethan Tyrion, the ex slaves and dragons can fit on the North. Jon really had to work to convince Stannis of the value of the mountain clans and repopulating the New Gift with wildlings. As Eddard knew, repopulating this area helps supply more, able men for the Wall and remittances to keep the Nights Watch going--Ned just didn't know where these people would come from! Thousands of slaves would contribute to that nicely ... Especially if the dragons play a role in defeating or tossing back the Others? Even the horse cultures would find their skills in demand here, raising garrons and destriers...

Dany's flexibility (or lack of plan) and desire to be loved as a ruler ... Could help with these scenarios.

[Giovanna Neve]

This seems realistic to me. Sansa has the luxury of being able to observe and to think in her own time. Dany doesn't, she has to respond and respond appropriately all the time, and everybody at her court watches her responses and judges them.

I don't think is the lack of opportunities. In all of Dany chapters I see it. She sometimes look... dumb to me. In big and little things.

[QuaitheTheShadow]

We have seen three people ruling so far Cersei, Dany and Jon and all of them fail in their own way. The one thing they have in common is the absence of effective and useful advisors who can challenge them, support them and assist them.

Dany I'd say is in the worst position of all three and this probably has a bearing on the lack of a long term plan for Westeros

If we examine the current state of Jon, Stannis, Robb, Tywin / Cersei, and Dany's 'people' I'd argue they're all in a rather similar situation at the moment.

Robb's men are mostly dead, scattered, now loyal to his enemies, or hostages in the Twins. Stannis' men are either freezing at the Wall waiting to be attacked by Others or freezing near Winterfell ready to die during a siege. They're also half loyal to the possibly mad red priestess. Tywin's personal shortcomings and policy of exterminating opposition has left the realm in the hand of a sadist (Joffrey) and then an ineffective and paranoid autocrat (Cersei) and in danger of starving. Jon's men - some have betrayed him, many vehemently disagree with his policy toward the wildlings, all are about to be savaged by others, and -if John lives - the rest will be thrown into battle against Bolton.

So, whether you are/were being led by Dany, Tywin / Cersei, Stannis, Robb, or Jon things aren't looking up right now.

[Ivy Snow]

I don't think is the lack of opportunities. In all of Dany chapters I see it. She sometimes look... dumb to me. In big and little things.

I also don't think she lacks opportunities. She had Jorah and Barristan to ask counsel from, but there were times that she shunned them. Oh I don't know, maybe because she's the blood of the dragon and they don't have the right to lecture her.

She may lack good advisers but she has some. She sent one away and the one she's left with, she doesn't heed that much.

If she just learns the art of listening and undestanding, and also learn how to swallow her ego, maybe she'll be a better leader.

[Kittyhat]

I also don't think she lacks opportunities. She had Jorah and Barristan to ask counsel from, but there were times that she shunned them. Oh I don't know, maybe because she's the blood of the dragon and they don't have the right to lecture her.

Or it could be because they were lying to her, possibly. Especially because it objectively was.

She may lack good advisers but she has some. She sent one away and the one she's left with, she doesn't heed that much.

She happened to have learned that her "good advisor" was a sellout spy. As it happens, that's also why she sent him away, whether you agree with that decision or not.

So yeah.

[Ivy Snow]

The one you quoted from me doesn't mention that she sent him away out of arrogance. I just said she sent him away. Never did I mention there that she sent him away out of arrogance, whatsoever.

"You cannot claim them all, child," Ser Jorah said, the fourth time they stopped, while the warriors of her khas herded her new slaves behind her.

"I am khaleesi, heir to the Seven Kingdoms, the blood of the dragon," Dany reminded him. "It is not for you to tell me what I cannot do."

This is the line in the book that made me see her arrogance. Jorah was just showing her the reality that she really can't claim all, he wasn't even telling her what to do, he was merely showing her that she has limitations as well but she responded with that.

And calling me or my post ignorant just because I'm stating my opinion isn't nice. But hey, ok if that's how you swing.

[Kittyhat]

The one you quoted from me doesn't mention that she sent him away out of arrogance. I just said she sent him away. Never did I mention there that she sent him away out of arrogance, whatsoever.

Oh, I totally never did either.

See, I can edit my posts, too!

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Oh, I totally never did either.

See, I can edit my posts, too!

Is it really necessary for you to be so nasty to people?

[Howling Mad]

Is it really necessary for you to be so nasty to people?

There are many people who would answer this question in the affirmative.

[Kittyhat]

There are many people who would answer this question in the affirmative.

Count me among them in the case of people who are intentionally dishonest. Editing your post to remove a word you specifically used, then claiming you never used the word? That's ... in poor taste.

But I tried to make my reaction relatively light!

[Ivy Snow]

Oh, I totally never did either.

See, I can edit my posts, too!

Count me among them in the case of people who are intentionally dishonest. Editing your post to remove a word you specifically used, then claiming you never used the word? That's ... in poor taste.

But I tried to make my reaction relatively light!

IFYI the edit part of my post was because I ADDED more information and didn't remove any. I'm not that type to remove words in my posts just to cover my tracks. What makes you think I edited it just to cover my tracks? Is that what you do that's why you think people do it the same?

If you want, do check with the mod if I ever removed the word " arrogance" in my statement.

Well whatever, I don't need to prove myself to you. You're mostly mean to other people in this thread.

Is it really necessary for you to be so nasty to people?

Yea, I noticed that she/ he is especially to you and Dr. Pepper.

[Dr. Pepper]

Yea, I noticed that she/ he is especially to you and Dr. Pepper.

She's like that all over the board. If you are ever in the mood to argue with someone, just ask Kittyhat to provide evidence from the text. Expect to be called stupid, silly and a would-be genius for daring to ask for evidence and then be called ignorant for having the gall to back up your opinion with the text. Kittyhat is a dragon. Dragons are the new trolls.

[Howling Mad]

But I tried to make my reaction relatively light!

That's usually my appraoch. It must be spring fever or something but there sure is a lot of angst in Westeros as of late, which reminds me of Daenerys. Back on topic IMO Daenerys has no fracking idea what she would do with Westeros in the short term or long term. Its been the experience of history that conquerers usually fail to make arrangements for the long term especially plans for the peaceful transition of power.

[Ivy Snow]

She's like that all over the board. If you are ever in the mood to argue with someone, just ask Kittyhat to provide evidence from the text. Expect to be called stupid, silly and a would-be genius for daring to ask for evidence and then be called ignorant for having the gall to back up your opinion with the text. Kittyhat is a dragon. Dragons are the new trolls.

Yea, I noticed. Let's just ignore her.

That's usually my appraoch. It must be spring fever or something but there sure is a lot of angst in Westeros as of late, which reminds me of Daenerys. Back on topic IMO Daenerys has no fracking idea what she would do with Westeros in the short term or long term. Its been the experience of history that conquerers usually fail to make arrangements for the long term especially plans for the peaceful transition of power.

Thank you for reeling us back to the topic. Anyway, all I get from the book is that she wants to claim what's hers by right. Westeros was claimed by Targs through conquest. They lost that right a long time ago when all houses swore fealty to the Baratheons. She doesn't have the right just like that woman who lost her right to her house when she left it and other people already lives in it. They aren't living in this time where houses and lots can be reclaimed by previous owner with legal documents backing him up.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Thank you for reeling us back to the topic. Anyway, all I get from the book is that she wants to claim what's hers by right. Westeros was claimed by Targs through conquest. They lost that right a long time ago when all houses swore fealty to the Baratheons. She doesn't have the right just like that woman who lost her right to her house when she left it and other people already lives in it. They aren't living in this time where houses and lots can be reclaimed by previous owner with legal documents backing him up.

I really think that the woman who fled her house and whom Dany rules against in her bid to reclaim it is a huge thematic point, one that I wish more people would notice. It had to have been included intentionally and not just for filler. So what does it signify? That Dany is so bent on retaking Westeros that she can't see that, by her own admission, it doesn't really belong to her anymore, if it ever did.

[Howling Mad]

I don't get hung up one the "mine by right" wording. Every conquerer and revolutionary convinces themselves that it's their right to wrest power away from others. Doesn't matter if its Daenerys, or Lenin those seeking power always see it as their right to take it away from you.

[Ivy Snow]

I really think that the woman who fled her house and whom Dany rules against in her bid to reclaim it is a huge thematic point, one that I wish more people would notice. It had to have been included intentionally and not just for filler. So what does it signify? That Dany is so bent on retaking Westeros that she can't see that, by her own admission, it doesn't really belong to her anymore, if it ever did.

I agree that it does have significance. It was something that Martin would like us to notice but gave it subtly. GRMM does like to give us truths in a subtle way.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I don't get hung up one the "mine by right" wording. Every conquerer and revolutionary convinces themselves that it's their right to wrest power away from others. Doesn't matter if its Daenerys, or Lenin those seeking power always see it as their right to take it away from you.

I think it's important though because it could turn out to show just what kind of a person she really is. It's one thing to rail against the Usurper and think that your birthright's been stolen when you think you're the last in your line. And though I disagree with that premise — I see it as, the Targs lost, they're shit out of luck — it makes sense from Dany's perspective and the perspective of people who still support the Targ claim.

But.

What will Dany do when she's confronted with "Aegon," Rhaegar's son (allegedly) with a claim that's superior to hers? If birthright and legal succession mean as much to her as she claims, she should step aside for him. But will she? That's what I mean — "Aegon" will put her convictions on the line and show whether she's a hypocrite or not. That's part of the reason why I think "Aegon's" veracity will never be stated outright. Dany might very well fight and kill him never knowing, apart from muttering about prophecy, whether he was really Aegon. It adds complexity to the issue if it will always be a possibility that Dany really did murder her nephew in a paranoid fit because she thought he was a fake out to steal her birthright.

[Howling Mad]

I think it's important though because it could turn out to show just what kind of a person she really is. It's one thing to rail against the Usurper and think that your birthright's been stolen when you think you're the last in your line. And though I disagree with that premise — I see it as, the Targs lost, they're shit out of luck — it makes sense from Dany's perspective and the perspective of people who still support the Targ claim.

But.

What will Dany do when she's confronted with "Aegon," Rhaegar's son (allegedly) with a claim that's superior to hers? If birthright and legal succession mean as much to her as she claims, she should step aside for him. But will she? That's what I mean — "Aegon" will put her convictions on the line and show whether she's a hypocrite or not. That's part of the reason why I think "Aegon's" veracity will never be stated outright. Dany might very well fight and kill him never knowing, apart from muttering about prophecy, whether he was really Aegon. It adds complexity to the issue if it will always be a possibility that Dany really did murder her nephew in a paranoid fit because she thought he was a fake out to steal her birthright.

I don't see her having a moment of doubt and I don't think it will test her convictions. She will dismiss Aegon's claim simply because the switched at birth story is too convenient, too perfect, and ultimately unprovable. We readers may know the truth of a character's lineage, if GRRM chooses to share that truth, but he characters can never really know for sure what the truth is. Therfore the charcters Daenerys, Aegon, JonCon, Jon Snow-Stark-Targeryn are free to believe whoever or whatever without a test of their convictions. For example let's suppose that Howland Reed finally appears and tells Jon his parents were R+L. Jon can choose to believe or dismiss Howland Reed. If he dismisses the story there is no testing of his conviction he simply remains Ned's son and chalks Howland up to being a crackpot or a schemer. Its only if Jon chooses to believe that his convictions (I'm a Stark, a FM, a brother of the NW) get tested. Since It will totally be within Daenerys' character not to believe Aegon VI is the real deal then her convictions won't be tested.

I may have rambled here hopefully I made my point.

Edit <spelling>