Which of the following Monarchs would you serve?

[Faint]

Only the first is really a crime, and that can be framed in terms that Renly used earlier in the series to try to justify murder of others. Posing as Azor Ahai doesn't really hurt anybody, it just makes him look bad when/if the "real" AA ever reveals himself. Everyone has unsavory characters in their camp.

Perhaps I should have phrased it as "perceived crimes." No matter. My point, really, is that this seems an unnecessary argument. The story has provided Stannis with enough bad karma which will only continue into the future. As it is, he probably qualifies as a kinslayer and those of that kind tend to meet very nasty ends.

I agree that Stannis will or has suffered for his participation in the use of black magic, and I also believe Dany suffered after she first used dark magic, but I have yet to see her pay for the dragons.

Why should she have to pay for her dragons beyond what she has already paid? Because of the boy that Drogon killed?

[Dr. Pepper]

Why does so many people ignore the fact that Stannis doesn't know about the shadowbabies? He has remain ignorant, willfuly perhaps, but ignorant nevertheless

I don't believe ignorance is a legitimate excuse. Dany is very ignorant about a great many things and though I feel pity for her lack of education, I do not think it's reasonable to blame ignorance for a person's moral, political or military failure. "I didn't know" isn't an excuse that most people will accept. I think it's even worse for a person to say, "I don't want to know". Stannis is certainly guilty of this with regards to the shadowbabies.

[Kittyhat]

i never said their arguments were convincing, and your option of them has nothing to do with my post. My point was that if you don't agree...fine, but you can't get upset and flame people when they disagree with you.

You're welcome to spend as much time as you like trying to find even one post I've written, ever, that was directed as a personal attack against anyone.

I've attacked arguments and positions, yes. Never people. Not even when they attacked me personally.

[Gingerly Grumkin]

@Apple/Tippy

I don't believe in the gods, but I do believe in magic. And just like they say about god, magic works mysteriously. The Wolf and Stag were dead and Robert and Ned dropped.

But that's not that good of an argument, nor do I really care about it. Dark magic? Prey what's light magic? All I know is Renly defied his king almost in open battle.

But the Dragons? First of all, because they were born in an ill appealing manner they should die or live in a cave? Then bring in Tommen, why stop there actually Jon and all bastards too!

And I see nothing wrong with the pyre. Fire&Blood+She killed your husband and son= Burn that Bitch

[Sevumar]

Perhaps I should have phrased it as "perceived crimes." No matter. My point, really, is that this seems an unnecessary argument. The story has provided Stannis with enough bad karma which will only continue into the future. As it is, he probably qualifies as a kinslayer and those of that kind tend to meet very nasty ends.

A lot of people, kinslayers and family men among them, will meet nasty ends before the story is over. ASOIAF is not the kind of story where people who do bad things are necessarily destined to get their just desserts. In fact, I wouldn't put it past Martin to have some of the most infamous, most gray, and most damaged characters survive while those who have cleaner consciences die.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

You're welcome to spend as much time as you like trying to find even one post I've written, ever, that was directed as a personal attack against anyone.

I've attacked arguments and positions, yes. Never people. Not even when they attacked me personally.

I'm not going to go look through the thread...that's a bit much, so I'll take your word for it. Still my point remains. You attack their positions, so it stands to reason that they will attack yours.

[RedBean]

I'm one of those people that think Stannis and Dany are very similar in their outlook about getting their throne (they don't want it for power, but they do want it because of their "rights") and the methods they use to get it (both have used black magic, deal with somewhat unsavoury supporters, and if I remember correctly, they are the only two characters we know of who have actually burned people alive - something I can never agree with, no matter who is doing the burning or who is being burned). I think neither of them would be suited for the Iron Throne in the end, mainly because I don't think they'll get the support, Stannis was never popular. And while Dany might win them over with fear (of her dragons), she won't have them for long. Sure Barristan seems to think that everyone will get on their knees and shout "Prince Rhaegar's sister has come!" but he's kind of an old-fashioned knight, and Westeros is too broken and bleeding to flock to some dragon-riding warrior queen. It just doesn't seem feasible for either to be king/queen.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

I started a thread concerning the black magic to prevent further derailing of this thread.

[Sevumar]

And I see nothing wrong with the pyre. Fire&Blood+She killed your husband and son= Burn that Bitch

Dany's inconsistent views on justice and punishment are a big problem. She tends to give the benefit of the doubt to people she likes or she believes have suffered, but if you're someone who has annoyed or angered her, you get the full wrath of her emotionally-charged (and short-circuited) decision making process.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

And I see nothing wrong with the pyre. Fire&Blood+She killed your husband and son= Burn that Bitch

Drogo didn't use the poultice he was supposed to and got infected. It was his own damn fault. MMD told Dany not to bring anyone into the tent, and Jorah brings her into the tent. How is that MMD's fault? Especially considering that one pillaging, raping warlord was put down and another one was prevented. I'd call her an unsung hero.

[RedBean]

Why should she have to pay for her dragons beyond what she has already paid? Because of the boy that Drogon killed?

Drogon killed a girl. Her name was Hazzea. Please at least get the gender right.

[Faint]

A lot of people, kinslayers and family men among them, will meet nasty ends before the story is over. ASOIAF is not the kind of story where people who do bad things are necessarily destined to get their just desserts. In fact, I wouldn't put it past Martin to have some of the most infamous, most gray, and most damaged characters survive while those who have cleaner consciences die.

Truthfully speaking, I don't see that myself. I find the author much more conventional than he is often labeled. Will an odd character or two of dubious morality like Bronn finish their story on a high? Yeah, probably so. But I imagine most villains will get their "just desserts," as you put it.

Not that I think Stannis qualifies as a villain (at least, not yet), but his story seems destined for tragedy one way or another.

[Faint]

Drogon killed a girl. Her name was Hazzea. Please at least get the gender right.

Come now, am I supposed to remember faceless peons?!?

Just kidding. In all honesty, I'd simply forgotten, I really thought it was a boy for whatever reason.

[Sevumar]

Not that I think Stannis qualifies as a villain (at least, not yet), but his story seems destined for tragedy one way or another.

He seems like he could be destined for a tragic end as an unsung hero. I don't think he's necessarily going to survive, but a lot of people who have done terrible things will be left after Martin's war is over. The good and the bad alike will be forced to pick up the pieces and to find a way to go on in the changed world.

[Gingerly Grumkin]

@Apple

Didn't MMD say she knew it would happen? Said something about your son will be kill no one?

And what do you have to say about my colorful comparison between Dragons and Snow? (many died, for Lyanna's kidnapping)

[Associate Maester]

My view on shadow assassins is that they are somewhat analogous to unmanned aerial vehicles (aka drones) the US has been using these past few years.

By that I mean the use of such tools, even in service of just causes - and here I realize there is much room to debate the justice of a cause, in our world as well as in ASOIAF - raises important questions. But as troubling as drones and shadow assassins are, I do not think they are pre se evil.

I'm not prepared to enter a deeper discussion on this just now, certainly not in this thread, but I would say that the ethics of Melisandre's shadow assassins is not a settled question in my mind. I could go either way on them.

That's actually a great topic worthy of an entire thread. The ethics of said shadow babies, dragons, blood magic etc. I've got a similar view of the shadow babies and dragons (great tools. How about the ethics of using said tools). From a virtue ethic standpoint I'd say they are bad. From the practical view of winning battles\wars I'd say shadow babies minimize casualties (even if said assassins aren't "honourable"). Dragons I'm not sold on yet given the random wanton distraction (I'm waiting to see how the whole dragon thing turns out.)

Then again I'm another wacky Stannis fan!

To get back to the main topic. I'd prefer: Stannis, Rhaegar, Dany.

[Faint]

He seems like he could be destined for a tragic end as an unsung hero. I don't think he's necessarily going to survive, but a lot of people who have done terrible things will be left after Martin's war is over. The good and the bad alike will be forced to pick up the pieces and to find a way to go on in the changed world.

I don't know . . . so much foreshadowing painting him as a figure that will never bend until he is finally broken. I can see his story going in many different reactions, some where he is even overtly evil. It seems to me that his desperation will be his undoing in the end.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

@Apple

Didn't MMD say she knew it would happen? Said something about your son will be kill no one?

Rubbing salt in the wound. She had no control over Jorah bringing Dany into the tent — she told people NOT to come in. If she were trying to help Rhaego's death along, why not say that Dany had to be in the tent?

And what do you have to say about my colorful comparison between Dragons and Snow? (many died, for Lyanna's kidnapping)

I must have missed this one, sorry. Not sure what you're talking about.

[RedBean]

Come now, am I supposed to remember faceless peons?!?

Just kidding. In all honesty, I'd simply forgotten, I really thought it was a boy for whatever reason.

That's okay I guess. It was just that my regard for the dragons took a sharp downturn when I found out about the child.

[JKeats]

The thread has drifted considerably from where it began, which is fine of course. Within reason, discussions wandering off topic can still be fruitful.

But, in an attempt to venture back to the original questions, I'm going to give another reason to support Stannis. Because by the commonly accepted laws of succession, he is the rightful king. That is not an automatic trump card. Aerys was the rightful king as well, as were Maegor the Cruel and Aegon the Unworthy. If you are going to disregard long settled law, you ought to have good reasons. Stannis' enemies have not put forward good reasons, at least to my mind.

Robb Stark had the most worthy justification, but even so it falls a little short. Just my opinion, which I have defended in other threads on these boards.