Official Court of Law v 8, Daenerys Targaryen

[SeanF]

Drogo should have died, yes. But MMD brought him back in a brain dead state at the price of murdering an unborn child. This is not the work of a phsician acting in good faith :stillsick:

Agreed.

What I would say is that it is possible to sympathise greatly with both Dany, and Mirri Maz Duur, in these circumstances.

[the trees have eyes]

Agreed.

What I would say is that it is possible to sympathise greatly with both Dany, and Mirri Maz Duur, in these circumstances.

I'm sorry this got so off topic (I sense it still will!).

I do have sympathy with MMD prior to the blood magic part. She was a healer and a priestess among a peaceful people until a Dothraki Khalasar destroyed her world. She was raped, beaten and enslaved. What protection Dany offered her was late and slender, she may have preserved her life but it is clear MMD values that little "when all else that matters is gone" [sic].

The blood magic part is a classic does the end justify the means. She deceives Dany (though others contest this) in order to kill the stallion that mounts the world before his khalasar can trample any nations into dust, thus sacrificing one child to save countless others.

I am deliberately phrasing it that way to play up the comparisons with Stannis being pressed by the Queen's men to sacrifice Edric Storm to "save the world" (another end justify means situation) but of course MMD needs no one to persuade her and feels no guilt or remorse.

But I don't sympathise with her over the blood magic and killing children, I'm with Davos on that one.

[danm_999]

Let me ask you something that may sound offensive but it honestly isn't meant to be: Do you believe your own arguments?

I can't really construe how I wouldn't be offended by this. Either I'm so disengenous I'll continue to make an argument in bad faith, or I'm so stupid I can't see major logical problems with what I'm saying.

Sometimes people adopt a position in debate and stick to it even if they know it's not credible - take any politician or PR spokesmen.

Except I'm not being paid my MMD to sanitise her image, or make her eligible for office. In the case of a politician or PR spokesperson, there are fairly easy surface motivations to pick away at to discredit them.

Because you haven't addressed the points at all and to pretend otherwise is sophistry.

I've addressed them, you're just not content with my answers. Crucial distinction.

MMD does not tell Dany that Drogo will be left in a vegetative state. That is pertinent information no physician would withhold.

And as I've said, no decent physician would be as blunt as you want MMD to be and spell out to person their loved one is going to sit there and drool all day.

They'd use coded language. They'd recommend easing their suffering and 'making them comfortable' as a means to push for euthanasia. They'd talk about quality of life and how it'll be lacking. This is exactly what MMD does.

I mean, I'll reiterate; she recommends they ease Drogo's passing, calls the method by which to keep him alive "hard and dark" and tells her many consider death superior. Now, you might hear this information and not imagine 'vegetable' but how on earth could you possibly expect him to be 'as he was', which is exactly what Daenerys expects?

A woman is desperate to save her dying husband. She is close to being out of her mind with worry and is not able to deduce from MMD's vague hints that her husband will be brain dead.

This is my point. Daenerys is not in a sound state of mind. But she commands MMD to do what she says regardless, with consequences up to and including the threat of death. She basically rides over MMD's medical advice and tells her to save Drogo no matter the cost.

What she does worry is that her own life will be forfeit and MMD tells her that it won't be her life and says bring Drogo's horse. A nice bit of deception to hide that it is Rhaego she intends to kill.

It never is the horse's death that will pay for Drogo's life. She tells Dany afterwards that the horse was never teh price. So who's death will pay for Drogo's life? Who did she intend to kill? Answer that please.

My guess? One of Drogo's khalasar that was talking about how she was a witch and should have her throat slit.

But again, here's the problem with the 'pre-emtpive' logic. If MMD is selecting someone to die for the spell's sake, Rhaego is a bad tactical choice. Pick a bloodrider. Pick Jorah. Pick Daenerys (two deaths for the price of one given the pregnancy).

After all, as midwife she has the opportunity down the track to botch the birthing if she really wants Rhaego dead, so if she's a monstrous opportunist, Rhaego is not the person she'd be killing at this point.

You have a pretty fucked up view of how physicians communicate with the families of patients. They do explain the risks of procedures particularly if the family is requesting a risky procedure.

Magic isn't an operation though. It's not science. We're told this in ASOIAF repeatedly. It's a sword without a hilt. You can't gauge risks and consequences in specific terms, you can only be general. MMD tells Daenerys that the 'procedure' will be hard and dark, and isn't optimal, or necessarily better than death, probably because that's all she can say. Spells are erratic.

That's bullshit and I sincerely hope you think about what you said because you'd be facing a medical malpractice suit and peddling your crap that you said it was "hard and dark" and she should have worked out what you meant would look pretty feeble when you were asked how you made it clear to a distraught relative. You say she did this out of "tact", I say you need to acquaint yourself with medical ethics.

As above, a spell's mechanics is so removed from an operation to compare them is a fallacy.

Jorah or Dany? Why would she kill Jorah the Andal? He counts for nothing. He is not her enemy.

He's serving the people holding her leash. It's pretty obvious that despite the results of the spell, Drogo is done for politically within his own khalasar, and that Jorah is one of the last impediments to MMD escaping Daenerys' authority.

This is a Lamb woman who sees her people constantly butchered by the Dothraki khals so it is them she strikes against. Drogo - the undefeated Khal - and his unborn son, the stallion who will mount the world. Dany is a woman - virtually valueless in Dothraki society and once her son is dead and there is no reason to kill her, particularly as MMD leaves her unable to bear another child.

It would be easy for MMD to gauge from the interactions between Jorah and Daenerys that if MMD openly betrayed her, Jorah would execute her.

Nice try? Sheez. I left out that line because I don't have a kindle and type as little as I feel is germane.

Yeah, this is my point. You felt the line where MMD says it was the work of the Great Shephard wasn't germane. I don't know why you felt it wasn't germane.

I felt it was unnecessary to quote that as I didn't think you were serious about the great shepherd killing Rhaego rather than MMD.

I'm not. MMD is. It's not a confession from her, she thinks the Great Shephard killed Rhaego.

The key point is that Dany accuses her of knowing the price and the outcome, and then more directly of murdering her child within her.

To which MMD responds "you angered God".

Again, cutting this line totally shifts the tone of what MMD says.

If as you claim MMD did not intend for Rhaego to die why does she not say this?

Because it's a ridiculous accusation. Even Daenerys herself identifies Rhaego's killer was Jorah for carrying her into the tent when expressely told not to.

The angering of the great shepherd explains her motivation clearly enough - as does her vicous retort and cruel laughter to Dany when Dany claims that she saved her (none of which I'll quote due to length).

She only becomes cruel when Daenerys implies how greatful MMD should be to her.

Seriously, this person has 'rescued' MMD after she's been gang-raped and her village burnt. She has commanded her to save her husband, despite neither of them following her medical advice. She has ignored her advice about how Drogo should be allowed to die peacefully. She told her not to enter the tent, and she warned her that what came as a result of the spell is considered worse than death.

And now, she's being blamed for it all. All the fuck ups, all the ignored advice, all the misshaps, it's MMD's fault apparently. And she should be greatful, because Daenerys stopped her from being raped the sixth time. So yeah, I can see why she isn't kind of Daenerys here.

But honestly, her revelation that the horse was never the price and her response to Dany's direct accusation that she murdered her son "The stallion who mounts the world will burn no cities now. His khalasar shall trample no nations into dust." really should make it clear enough.

Again, that's not her response to that accusation. Her response is the angering of the Great Shephard.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

Danm_999 has already addressed most of your points, I'd only add:

What she does worry is that her own life will be forfeit and MMD tells her that it won't be her life and says bring Drogo's horse. A nice bit of deception to hide that it is Rhaego she intends to kill.

That's not what happens. MMD says only death may pay for life, Dany worries that it would be hers, MMD says no, not yours. The istant she does that, Dany commands her to go ahead. The horse is only fetched later. It was not used in any deception to get Dany to say yes, because Dany didn't care about the identity of the death as soon as she knew that it wouldn't be herself.

[the trees have eyes]

I can't really construe how I wouldn't be offended by this. Either I'm so disengenous I'll continue to make an argument in bad faith, or I'm so stupid I can't see major logical problems with what I'm saying.

Except I'm not being paid my MMD to sanitise her image, or make her eligible for office. In the case of a politician or PR spokesperson, there are fairly easy surface motivations to pick away at to discredit them.

I've addressed them, you're just not content with my answers. Crucial distinction.

And as I've said, no decent physician would be as blunt as you want MMD to be and spell out to person their loved one is going to sit there and drool all day.

They'd use coded language. They'd recommend easing their suffering and 'making them comfortable' as a means to push for euthanasia. They'd talk about quality of life and how it'll be lacking. This is exactly what MMD does.

I mean, I'll reiterate; she recommends they ease Drogo's passing, calls the method by which to keep him alive "hard and dark" and tells her many consider death superior. Now, you might hear this information and not imagine 'vegetable' but how on earth could you possibly expect him to be 'as he was', which is exactly what Daenerys expects?

This is my point. Daenerys is not in a sound state of mind. But she commands MMD to do what she says regardless, with consequences up to and including the threat of death. She basically rides over MMD's medical advice and tells her to save Drogo no matter the cost.

My guess? One of Drogo's khalasar that was talking about how she was a witch and should have her throat slit.

But again, here's the problem with the 'pre-emtpive' logic. If MMD is selecting someone to die for the spell's sake, Rhaego is a bad tactical choice. Pick a bloodrider. Pick Jorah. Pick Daenerys (two deaths for the price of one given the pregnancy).

After all, as midwife she has the opportunity down the track to botch the birthing if she really wants Rhaego dead, so if she's a monstrous opportunist, Rhaego is not the person she'd be killing at this point.

Magic isn't an operation though. It's not science. We're told this in ASOIAF repeatedly. It's a sword without a hilt. You can't gauge risks and consequences in specific terms, you can only be general. MMD tells Daenerys that the 'procedure' will be hard and dark, and isn't optimal, or necessarily better than death, probably because that's all she can say. Spells are erratic.

As above, a spell's mechanics is so removed from an operation to compare them is a fallacy.

He's serving the people holding her leash. It's pretty obvious that despite the results of the spell, Drogo is done for politically within his own khalasar, and that Jorah is one of the last impediments to MMD escaping Daenerys' authority.

It would be easy for MMD to gauge from the interactions between Jorah and Daenerys that if MMD openly betrayed her, Jorah would execute her.

Yeah, this is my point. You felt the line where MMD says it was the work of the Great Shephard wasn't germane. I don't know why you felt it wasn't germane.

I'm not. MMD is. It's not a confession from her, she thinks the Great Shephard killed Rhaego.

To which MMD responds "you angered God".

Again, cutting this line totally shifts the tone of what MMD says.

Because it's a ridiculous accusation. Even Daenerys herself identifies Rhaego's killer was Jorah for carrying her into the tent when expressely told not to.

She only becomes cruel when Daenerys implies how greatful MMD should be to her.

Seriously, this person has 'rescued' MMD after she's been gang-raped and her village burnt. She has commanded her to save her husband, despite neither of them following her medical advice. She has ignored her advice about how Drogo should be allowed to die peacefully. She told her not to enter the tent, and she warned her that what came as a result of the spell is considered worse than death.

And now, she's being blamed for it all. All the fuck ups, all the ignored advice, all the misshaps, it's MMD's fault apparently. And she should be greatful, because Daenerys stopped her from being raped the sixth time. So yeah, I can see why she isn't kind of Daenerys here.

Again, that's not her response to that accusation. Her response is the angering of the Great Shephard.

I will just ask again who you think MMD was going to kill since the horse was not the price. No need to type pages. The obvious answer is Rahego as, I am sure you will note, she is the only person MMD could have killed.

Please stop blaming the Great Shepherd, that is such a cop out. The Gods do not intervene directly in this series, their followers wield magical powers, whether shadowbabies & glamours or death for life switches. You have no basis for saying spells are erratic, you introduce that notion, no one else. There may be no safe way to grasp a sword without a hilt but that means there is a price to wielding the sword not that the sword itself is smehow "erratic" in its function, that sometimes the edge cuts and sometimes it doesn't.

You have typed lots but you are right that you have not presented any arguments that i find convincing that as I have stated from the start and as Dany acuses her: MMD knew the outcome and the price and tricked her into paying it.

It's neatly done by MMD and she accomplishes it remarkably easily.

Please understand that doctors take a certain approach to patients relatives in the case of terminal illnesses. If the relatives ask "is there anything that ca be done to save him?" they do not fuck about with the relatvies by saving the patient but a the same time performing a frontal lobotomy and then say he's alive, stop complaining. They explain what the risks are and, if they know something as significant as this about the patient's post-recovery condition they do not withhold it.

Unless of course you mean that MMD meant to restore Drogo to his former glory (and that his brain death is part of the alleged erraticness of magic) and to allow the stallion that mounts the world to be born and for his khalasar to trample nations into dust I don't see how you can say this. Despite the fact that they had burned her temple and angered the great shepherd you think she meant to heal and care for them so they could burn more temples and trample more nations?

I think you are too kind to MMD by a long way. She knows blood magic after all and she is not this whiter than white character you seem to be portrying her as. I think she 100% knew what she was doing.

Danm_999 has already addressed most of your points, I'd only add:

That's not what happens. MMD says only death may pay for life, Dany worries that it would be hers, MMD says no, not yours. The istant she does that, Dany commands her to go ahead. The horse is only fetched later. It was not used in any deception to get Dany to say yes, because Dany didn't care about the identity of the death as soon as she knew that it wouldn't be herself.

To say Dany didn't care about the identity of who would die is a bold assertion to make. If MMD had said your husband will be a vegetable and I will kill your son to save him do you really think she would have said yes?

The fact that MMD does not say who she will kill is curious by its absence don't you think? Of course she can't tell Dany who she intends to kill or she will never get the chance.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

To say Dany didn't care about the identity of who would die is a bold assertion to make.

You're just messing with us, right? You know that Dany only asked whether it would be her who had to die and commanded MMD to go ahead as soon as she heard it would be someone else, without even enquiring who (or wasting a single thought about it). But no, saying she did not care about the identity of her victim just because she didn't want to know would be bold. Sometimes I wonder whether you actually read what you're writing...

EDIT: Reflecting about it, it dawned on me that maybe you just don't understand the difference between "care about something" and "can under the right circumstances be made to care about something, e.g. if someone explains to you what exactly that something would or could entail". Well, in that case, I would like to ask you to learn that difference before writing about bold assertions.

[the trees have eyes]

You're just messing with us, right? You know that Dany only asked whether it would be her who had to die and commanded MMD to go ahead as soon as she heard it would be someone else, without even enquiring who (or wasting a single thought about it). But no, saying she did not care about the identity of her victim just because she didn't want to know would be bold. Sometimes I wonder whether you actually read what you're writing...

EDIT: Reflecting about it, it dawned on me that maybe you just don't understand the difference between "care about something" and "can under the right circumstances be made to care about something, e.g. if someone explains to you what exactly that something would or could entail". Well, in that case, I would like to ask you to learn that difference before writing about bold assertions.

I've no idea what point you are trying to make.

Are you really trying to say that she didn't care who died, even her son, so long as it wasn't her?

She obviously did care that it cost Rhaego's life, it's one of the reasons she executes MMD. It is absurd to argue that her temporary relief at realizing that she herself would not have to die is the same as saying she was prepared to sacrifice her son. She very much did care about the identity of who died.

I do read what I write and I really don't see what you object to - unless you genuinely think she wold have sacrificed Rhaego.

In which case we'll agree to differ.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

I've no idea what point you are trying to make.

My point, as I've abundantly tried to get into your head, is that when she orders the hit, Dany does not care about the identity of the victim as long as it's not her, as evidenced by her thoughts, words and actions. That she later realizes that this wasn't such a good idea does not change the past.

And no, I don't think it's necessary to agree to differ, because I don't believe you that you seriously doubt that. We can however agree that you never will admit it, if you prefer that.

[Pihla]

Could it be possible that Mirri did not know who would due to the spell? Perhaps she thought / hoped that a horse would be enough. As a slave Mirri has to do whatever Dany asks her to do, so she might felt forced to do uncertain spells with erratic outcomes. I don't remember, was there a threat made to Mirri that if Drogo dies she will die as well? Perhaps indeed the horse spirit/soul/life/whatever went to Khal Drogo, and caused the vegetable stage. Then the lives of Mirri, Drogo and Rhaego brought tree dragons alive. Maybe Mel is not the only maegi thinking that she has to make her powers appear to be as powerful as possible.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Quilty to them all.

Death by flaying. (oh boy)

[ILoveSummer]

i don't know if this was posted yet, but...

-Okay, you have an ancient house. you kill nearly all of them, just the pregnant mother and a eight-year-old-boy survive.

-let the mother die when she gives birth to her daughter.

-now let them flee through the whole world.

-the obviously mad boy shall tell the girl all the time that they are hunted by their family's murderer and that her mother's death and, well, the whole rebellion is her fault because she wasn't born soon enough. let him absolutely dominate and eventually beat her.

-after circa 12 years marry the girl to a savage clan leader for the promise of an army.

-get her pregnant.

-let her husband kill her brother.

-kill her unborn son, take her people away and make her beloved husband a vegetable.

if you were this girl, wouldn't you be totally mad? Try it out! Do this to a poor girl and afer all, get her an army of 10000 men and 3 dragons and you'll see what happens!

MMD's death was revenge for her husband and the rest...I don't know the english word when you can't be punished because you're absolutely mad (unzurechnungsfähig is the german word)

by the way, isn't she still under 18, so she can#t be punished in our world

so i say: NOT GUILTY!!!

we wouldn't do anything else.

[Erudain]

Case is already closed guys....theres court nº 9 still going if you'd like

[the trees have eyes]

My point, as I've abundantly tried to get into your head, is that when she orders the hit, Dany does not care about the identity of the victim as long as it's not her, as evidenced by her thoughts, words and actions. That she later realizes that this wasn't such a good idea does not change the past.

And no, I don't think it's necessary to agree to differ, because I don't believe you that you seriously doubt that. We can however agree that you never will admit it, if you prefer that.

I think you are being deliberately argumentative. It is not made clear to her that the price is her child's life. The price is not made clear to her at all. This is called trickery. It is a whole world apart from the notion you are presenting: that she did not care what the price is.

This really should be obvious if you even care to consider it for a moment. Mothers do not tend to sacrifice their children and pregnant women tend to do everything they can to safeguard their unborn children. It is made obvious that she cares who dies by her accusing MMD of both tricking her and murdering her child within her. The fact that it didn't occur to her that someone who she thought was helping her might murder her child does not mean she didn't care if her child died.

However "abundantly" you try and get that notion into my head with the "evidence" you muster to support it it is still an implausible notion and poorly reasoned so, no, you won't get me to "admit" to something that is patently absurd and palpably false.

Carry on hating and have a nice day :kiss:

[The Dornishman's Wife]

I think you are being deliberately argumentative. It is not made clear to her that the price is her child's life. The price is not made clear to her at all. This is called trickery. It is a whole world apart from the notion you are presenting: that she did not care what the price is.

She is told there is a price. She makes sure the price isn't her, so she orders to go ahead without even asking (or wondering) who else it might be - assuming you know the meaning of the word care, you should be able to understand that in that moment she didn't.

Later, she did of course find that she should have.... but that does not change the past and that she did not care about the id of the death when she ordered the procedure.

Honestly, I'm perplexed by how a person that's capable to read and write wouldn't get that.

Look, I assume you can think rationally about other characters, since you seem to have a strange roadblock in your head where MMD is concerned: Cersei tells Qyburn she doesn't care about the rise of dragons in the east. Let's say that Dany will turn out to be the younger queen from Cersei's prophecy (as many suspect), then this would have been very important to Cersei, and, had she known, she would have cared a great deal. Does that mean she lied to Qyburn when she said she didn't care? Of course not.

Sometimes people don't care about what will later turn out to be important for them after all. Deal with it.

Edit: Oh, by the way there's no call to complain that I "hate" you just because you fail to grasp the concept that someone may care at one point of time and not care at another. For the record, I do not think you are despicable or hateworthy in any way, just immensely childish and while I do not believe that I have given you actual cause to think otherwise, I do apologize if I have somehow led you to a different impression.

[the trees have eyes]

She is told there is a price. She makes sure the price isn't her, so she orders to go ahead without even asking (or wondering) who else it might be - assuming you know the meaning of the word care, you should be able to understand that in that moment she didn't.

Later, she did of course find that she should have.... but that does not change the past and that she did not care about the id of the death when she ordered the procedure.

Honestly, I'm perplexed by how a person that's capable to read and write wouldn't get that.

Look, I assume you can think rationally about other characters, since you seem to have a strange roadblock in your head where MMD is concerned: Cersei tells Qyburn she doesn't care about the rise of dragons in the east. Let's say that Dany will turn out to be the younger queen from Cersei's prophecy (as many suspect), then this would have been very important to Cersei, and, had she known, she would have cared a great deal. Does that mean she lied to Qyburn when she said she didn't care? Of course not.

Sometimes people don't care about what will later turn out to be important for them after all. Deal with it.

Edit: Oh, by the way there's no call to complain that I "hate" you just because you fail to grasp the concept that someone may care at one point of time and not care at another. For the record, I do not think you are despicable or hateworthy in any way, just immensely childish and while I do not believe that I have given you actual cause to think otherwise, I do apologize if I have somehow led you to a different impression.

pfft, calm down and try not to have some kind of episode over this :rolleyes:

The reason she doesn't ask what the price is pretty obviously because if she does the story doesn't work. If she asks and is told then she doesn't agree and none of it happens. All that dramatic tension with the exercise of blood magic, her guards fighting Drogo's bloodriders, the confrontation between her and MMD after Rhaego's murder and the dramatic finale of her hatching the dragons on Drogo's (and MMD's) funeral pyre doesn't happen. It doesn't happen and the story is much poorer and much less shocking and much less dramatic for it.

Kudos to GRRM for building it up so Dany thinks she has a way to keep Drogo alive without any price but the horse. Kudos to GRRM for showing that when people are desperate for the lives of their loved ones they aren't as clear-minded, as rational or as suspicious of tricks and traps as you or I.

I would still like to understand what your point is. My first reply to the "she didn't care" argument still stands: she cared very much that her son not be the victim. Are you so literal-minded that you need to see that in the text that before you consider it? Or do you really think that she didn't care and changed her mind later?

I meant carry on hating Dany, I'm not so thin-skinned as to be bothered by an internet disagreement with a stranger over a fictional scene and character motivation for the good lord's sake.

You think what you think, fine. But it looks kind of blinkered by an inability to really think about what state Dany was in, how GRRM needed to set the scene up for it to work, or to grasp that MMD was hiding the true price from Dany.

You say people can care about something later that they did not care about earlier. Well of course. But the life of her child? No that's bullshit. She always cared about the life of her child, she just didn't imagine that MMD planned to kill him. We only get that later. I call that good writing and it's what makes this series so good in my opinion.

I suggest you set your preconceptions aside, read it again and ask yourself whether you really think MMD is such an innocent in what happens to Rhaego and whether you think Dany believed that the horse was the price.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

I suggest you set your preconceptions aside, read it again and ask yourself whether you really think MMD is such an innocent in what happens to Rhaego and whether you think Dany believed that the horse was the price.

I'm sorry, and I can't put this any friendlier, but if you actually believe that Dany believed the horse was the price when she ordered MMD to go ahead even after being told repeatedly that this is wrong then you have a bad case of "unable to pick up the book and actually read it before spouting nonsense about it".

Dany gave the order as soon as she ascertained that the sacrifice wouldn't be herself, the horse stuff only happens later (servants are commanded, Drogo is bathed and only then is the horse called for).

I fail to see how actually reading the books instead of inventing some distorting fantasy is "hating Dany". For the record though, I do find her behaviour in this scene quite understandable. You seem to be the one who thinks that Dany is portrayed as some insane caricature because of plot reasons:

The reason she doesn't ask what the price is pretty obviously because if she does the story doesn't work.

So, you maintain that Dany cares deeply about the identity of the death, but of course she can't ask, or even think, about who it is (beyond that it's not her) because GRRM is such a bad writer that he doesn't let her for plot reasons? No. In that moment, she didn't care.

That doesn't mean that she would not have cared about her victim's ID if she had been told that it would be her son. But she wasn't, so she didn't. What's so difficult about that? :dunno:

[SerBrightflame]

1. Four Counts of Murder:-

1.1 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully killed a godswife, Mirri Maz Duur, by ordering her to be tied to her husband’s funeral pyre, and then burning her alive.

Innocent. MMD was sentenced to death for her murder of Rhaego.

1.2 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully killed Kraznys mo Nakloz, a citizen of Astapor by instructing her dragon, Drogon, to burn him to death, which instruction was carried out.

Innocent. The punishment for slavery is death.

1.3 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully ordered her soldiers to kill a citizen of Astapor, Grazdan mo Ullor, and to massacre the adult free male inhabitants of Astapor, which order was carried out.

Innocent. She was at war. It was lawful.

1.4 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully crucified 163 of the Great Masters of Mereen.

Innocent. They killed 163 slave children and were punished.

2. One Count of Genocide.

The massacre of the adult free males of Astapor, detailed in charge 1.3, amounted to the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group

Guilty

3. Four Counts of Torture

3.1 The burning of Mirri Maz Duur, detailed in charge 1.1, amounted to torture.

Innocent. Death by fire is the purest death.

3.2 The crucifixion of the Great Masters, detailed in charge 1.4, amounted to torture.

Guilty

3.3 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully ordered two wineseller’s daughters to be tortured in front of her father, in order to procure information relating to the Sons of the Harpy.

Guilty

3.4 The Defendant, intentionally and unlawfully ordered numerous unnamed inhabitants of Mereen to be tortured, on suspicion that they were Sons of the Harpy.

Innocent. She was protecting her freemen from genocide.

4. Two Counts of Criminal Damage to Property.

4.1 The Defendant unlawfully and intentionally set fire to the House of the Undying in Qarth, resulting in its destruction.

Innocent. She was a captive.

4.2 The Defendant unlawfully and intentionally sacked the City of Mereen, resulting in millions of Dragons’ worth of destruction to property.

Innocent

5. Two counts of Waging Wars of Aggression

5.1 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully waged a war of aggression against Yunkai

Innocent

5.2 The Defendant intentionally and unlawfully waged a war of aggression against Mereen

Innocent

The Khaleesi must pay a fine to the wine-sellers daughters and assist in the rebuilding of Astapor.

[Carey Snow]

You're just messing with us, right? You know that Dany only asked whether it would be her who had to die and commanded MMD to go ahead as soon as she heard it would be someone else, without even enquiring who (or wasting a single thought about it). But no, saying she did not care about the identity of her victim just because she didn't want to know would be bold. Sometimes I wonder whether you actually read what you're writing...

EDIT: Reflecting about it, it dawned on me that maybe you just don't understand the difference between "care about something" and "can under the right circumstances be made to care about something, e.g. if someone explains to you what exactly that something would or could entail". Well, in that case, I would like to ask you to learn that difference before writing about bold assertions.

As a fourteen year old girl, when the witch answered that Dany's life was not the cost, there was no reason for Dany to think that it had to be a human one. Obviously, if a human life was needed she would offer her own. Thus the misunderstanding that the Horse's life would suffice for the blood magic.

[the trees have eyes]

I'm sorry, and I can't put this any friendlier, but if you actually believe that Dany believed the horse was the price when she ordered MMD to go ahead even after being told repeatedly that this is wrong then you have a bad case of "unable to pick up the book and actually read it before spouting nonsense about it".

Yes. You didn't pick it up again did you? It shows. And just what do you mean by "being told repeatedly". If you mean the book, give a quote. To be "friendly" you need to put up or shut up. If you mean you are telling me repeatedly, then so what? You need to show where she is told or understands what the price is: can you do that? Can you find anything other than MMD calling for and killing the horse. Please do show what you have.

Dany gave the order as soon as she ascertained that the sacrifice wouldn't be herself, the horse stuff only happens later (servants are commanded, Drogo is bathed and only then is the horse called for).

I fail to see how actually reading the books instead of inventing some distorting fantasy is "hating Dany". For the record though, I do find her behaviour in this scene quite understandable. You seem to be the one who thinks that Dany is portrayed as some insane caricature because of plot reasons:

Inventing some distorting fantasy? I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't think she is portrayed as some insane caricature, don't invent stuff. What she is, is distraught and desperate, desperate enough to resort to blood magic, and distraught enough to fail to spot a trap. Which of course none of us did until afterwards. I happen to think that sort of unexpected turn of events, eased in subtly so we don't really pick up on it until he hits us with it is what makes GRRM a good writer.

So, you maintain that Dany cares deeply about the identity of the death, but of course she can't ask, or even think, about who it is (beyond that it's not her) because GRRM is such a bad writer that he doesn't let her for plot reasons? No. In that moment, she didn't care.

Yes, obviously for plot reasons :rolleyes: . "I'm going to kill your son so the stallion that mounts the world will trample no nations into dust" is not something MMD can say and then have events play out the way he intends. What is so hard to get about that idea? Bad writing, you say? Rubbish, the way the story unfolds is brilliant.

That doesn't mean that she would not have cared about her victim's ID if she had been told that it would be her son. But she wasn't, so she didn't. What's so difficult about that? :dunno:

I think you are getting the idea, you've just stopped half way. If she learns it's Jorah what would she do? Or Irri or Rakharo? But GRRM wants the realization of the price to be after the event, when it is too late, when it is a deeply shocking and immensely personal loss for her not a moral conundrum in advance like Stannis has with Edric Storm. If she learns the price the story doesn't happen the way he wants it to. It is as simple as that.

[The Dornishman's Wife]

[TDW:] I'm sorry, and I can't put this any friendlier, but if you actually believe that Dany believed the horse was the price when she ordered MMD to go ahead even after being told repeatedly that this is wrong then you have a bad case of "unable to pick up the book and actually read it before spouting nonsense about it".

[TTHE:] Yes. You didn't pick it up again did you? It shows. And just what do you mean by "being told repeatedly". If you mean the book, give a quote. To be "friendly" you need to put up or shut up. If you mean you are telling me repeatedly, then so what?

God, that is getting ridiculous.

When Dany ordered MMD to go ahead, NOONE HAD SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE HORSE, that only came later.

Dany did not believe it was the horse at the moment she ordered MMD to "do it then", because the horse had not even been mentioned.

You know, cause before effect and all that.