Rhaegarsjoy Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 No, the dragons are the tool to enforce her arbitrary rule over people who do not want her. Here lies the difference between rightful restoration, and cunquering oppression. Dany is either what people want, and thier will makes her queen, or people do not want her, and she has dragons to make them accept her. One bends the knee because he wants to, or because he has to. Since she isn't in westeros YET it's hard to say what ppl would want, since we have no POV from anyone other than those seeking the throne for themselves. As of now we have the the lannisters and tyrells which have no right to that throne, Stannis and the Iron born neither of whom anyone wants and finally Aegon who is trying to conquer without telling people who he is and a chance to join him, even stannis did that. And Dany no where near Westeros but she's the ONLY one apparently forcing westeros to accept her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaegarsjoy Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 She can but I think she will not have all 3, or atleast all 3 under her control when she arrives. Anyways, I think she will find more resistance even if they are under her power and breathing fire. There are too many factions that hated the dragons. The Iron Bank who has a vested interest in Westeros has made it clear how they feel about dragons. The Maesters of the Citidel. The Faceless Men as well.Unless you have the last two books those are your personal theories without any prove. And 2/3 factions that hate dragons are not in or part of westeros and don't get a vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 She can but I think she will not have all 3, or atleast all 3 under her control when she arrives. Anyways, I think she will find more resistance even if they are under her power and breathing fire. There are too many factions that hated the dragons. The Iron Bank who has a vested interest in Westeros has made it clear how they feel about dragons. The Maesters of the Citidel. The Faceless Men as well.Well if they were smart they would have tried to take out the dragons when they were small, the longer they wait, the bigger and more powerful the dragons get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Damian Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Unless you have the last two books those are your personal theories without any prove. And 2/3 factions that hate dragons are not in or part of westeros and don't get a vote.Well, the iron Bank essentually owns the debt notes to Westeros, they get a vote and are powerfull, The faceless men seem to have taken the identity of Pate at the Citidel so they are there as well. Last of all yes, these forums are about personal opinions intertwined with the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Damian Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Well if they were smart they would have tried to take out the dragons when they were small, the longer they wait, the bigger and more powerful the dragons get.Yes, but their big chance will be that they or atleast the two released by Quentin are untamed. Vic is trying to change that. If Dany can "control" then or Tyrion for her, look out, that is bad for everyone back in Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulled Wino Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 first off, dany's ancestral home isn't kings landing. It's either Valyeria or Dragonstone. she never lived in KL correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrhex Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Since she isn't in westeros YET it's hard to say what ppl would want, since we have no POV from anyone other than those seeking the throne for themselves. As of now we have the the lannisters and tyrells which have no right to that throne, Stannis and the Iron born neither of whom anyone wants and finally Aegon who is trying to conquer without telling people who he is and a chance to join him, even stannis did that. And Dany no where near Westeros but she's the ONLY one apparently forcing westeros to accept her?The Lannisters and the Tyrells are riding the Baratheon's legitimacy. The ones following Stannis are those who fled after the Blackwater and did not get captured and forced to bend (most of the Stormlords, and some from the Reach and Crownlands). If most of the people knew that the twincest is real, and not propaganda, Stannis has much support in Westeros, as most consider his dynasty the rightful one. The Northern lords want to bring down the Boltons, and they accept Stannis as king if he can make good on his end the deal. Manderly adds the returning of the Starks to power as Wardens of the North for his support, and Davos agrees in the name of Stannis.Dany had massacared one city that did not accept her, sacked the other, and took over the third. Judging from her actions in those three cities, it's hard to say that she will take rejection well. If you are going to talk bout the slaves worshiping her, that is irrelevent. There are none in Westeros, other then the ones on board the fleet of her latest "ally" - Vic the Thick. She was known to be alive since Bob's 'bellion. No one sent a single dragon from Westeros so she would find a place to stay for the night. Once Darry's cash went and he died, Vyserys had to sell his mother's crown. Nobody particularly wants her on the throne in Westeros. Aegon is also not counting on the support of the locals other then Dorne - He brought exiles and claiments of the Golden Company. If some former loyalists join him - well and good. If not, they can be replaced. He too is banking on his ability to force Westeros to accept him, even if it's slightly over optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 first off, dany's ancestral home isn't kings landing. It's either Valyeria or Dragonstone. she never lived in KL correct?Her ancestors did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrhex Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 first off, dany's ancestral home isn't kings landing. It's either Valyeria or Dragonstone. she never lived in KL correct?Semi-Correct. She was born on Dragonstone and was never on the Westeros mainland. However, the annexation of Dragonstone to the property of the crown, as given to the heir of the throne, added Dragonstone to the holdings the Baratheons conquered. She has no right to it any more then any of us have right to the hospitals we were born in, under Westerosi law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Damian Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 The ancestrial home of the Valaryens was all but destoryed in Valaria by a seemingly "MT Krakatoa" type of event. The Targs had migrated to Dragonstone 100 years earlier. Westeros was her family's home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaegarsjoy Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 first off, dany's ancestral home isn't kings landing. It's either Valyeria or Dragonstone. she never lived in KL correct?She was born in dragonstone which is part of westeros, KL is the Capitol it's not westeros. Second Valyria is gone asking her to go back to wherever her ancestors came from is like asking the first men, andals and rhoynar to go back to where they came from. Dany had massacared one city that did not accept her, sacked the other, and took over the third. Judging from her actions in those three cities, it's hard to say that she will take rejection well. If you are going to talk bout the slaves worshiping her, that is irrelevent. There are none in Westeros, other then the ones on board the fleet of her latest "ally" - Vic the Thick. She was known to be alive since Bob's 'bellion. No one sent a single dragon from Westeros so she would find a place to stay for the night. Once Darry's cash went and he died, Vyserys had to sell his mother's crown. Nobody particularly wants her on the throne in Westeros. Aegon is also not counting on the support of the locals other then Dorne - He brought exiles and claiments of the Golden Company. If some former loyalists join him - well and good. If not, they can be replaced. He too is banking on his ability to force Westeros to accept him, even if it's slightly over optimistic.The difference being she wasn't trying to conquer those slave cities just renounce their practice of slavery. Second every single rebelion, war has proven ppl are not going to tie their faith with an infant that can bring them nothing but death of their families, even doran had to keep his plans a secret, her turning up with 3 dragons, 10,000 unsullied and sellswords and asking if their are any Targaryen supporters left is a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrhex Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 The difference being she wasn't trying to conquer those slave cities just renounce their practice of slavery.Where is the difference? She conquered those cities and changed thier laws, completely ignoring thier Sovereignty. And she is now ruling as Queen of Meereen. No, not conquering, simply ignoring someone's sovereignty and decalring oneself as Monarch of a city that used to by an Oligarchy, that is totaly different from conquering... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Damian Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Where is the difference? She conquered those cities and changed thier laws, completely ignoring thier Sovereignty. And she is now ruling as Queen of Meereen. No, not conquering, simply ignoring someone's sovereignty and decalring oneself as Monarch of a city that used to by an Oligarchy, that is totaly different from conquering...Yeah, is it not funny that the Valaryen freehold did not have any monarchs. The Targs burned Westeros with dragons and placed themselves on a throne that none of their ancestors, nor contemporaries ever did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaegarsjoy Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 If you are going to talk bout the slaves worshiping her, that is irrelevent. There are none in Westeros, She doesn't need to worry about changing westeros's laws since they don't practice slavery. What other laws will she impose on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrhex Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 She doesn't need to worry about changing westeros's laws since they don't practice slavery. What other laws will she impose on them?I meant she can't bank on having slaves' support once she frees them, as there are none in Westeros. Nobody in Slaver's Bay wants her but the slaves. In Westeros there are'nt many who want her, and the lack of slaves kinds of limits her pool of potential followers to former loyalists only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Aegon didn't restored the rights of the Florents, heir to Highgarden or Volmarks, heirs of Harren the Black. Targaryen conquest rests with taking right, not restoring them.If she can suceed, fine. But in the end, the ironborn are right, you get what you can take and keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulled Wino Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Her ancestors did.still not comparable to WF, if anything dragonstone would be the closest, but comparing the OP seems to be talking about Dany getting her rightful family lands back. That would be more Dragonstone than KL. Then the comparison o the Starks losing their home for 8000+ years doesn't seem the same as Dany trying to get back to KL, where she never lived or Dragonstone which was a Targ stronghold for 400 years.Dany never talks about getting Dragonstone back...only the throne. You don't see Starks running around crying about not having the regency or being King in the North. The premise of the thread is just wrong, they are not comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 The premise of the thread is just wrong, they are not comparable.:agree: Dany is fighting for a claim she lost, a kingdom she's never set foot in and subjects who don't want her. The Starks are fighting for a claim they still have, a kingdom they've been raised in and subjects who want them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tydides Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 When you say the Targs you mean the Mad King Aerys,you aren't saying all the Targs as in Elia and her baby boy and young daughter had it coming I hope.No, of course not. I mean Aerys. Why would I mean Elia? She was more of a Dornish hostage than a Targaryen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulled Wino Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 :agree:Dany is fighting for a claim she lost, a kingdom she's never set foot in and subjects who don't want her.The Starks are fighting for a claim they still have, a kingdom they've been raised in and subjects who want them.It's quite the reach for Dany fans to even try this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.