[ SECRET POST #4069 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4069 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________














09. [SPOILERS for Stargate Origins]



__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for possible discussion of nazis/genocide/etc]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #582.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. https://i.imgur.com/jxYINj2.png

[(Anonymous)]

i don't think "WMD" is a useful phrase to use in this context . cause, like, it's not a WMD. it's a dragon. calling it a WMD just invites confusion.

[(Anonymous)]

In the medieval world, a dragon is definitely a weapon of mass destruction. The only thing that MIGHT be a bigger WMD is wildfire. But that is like comparing an atomic and hydrogen bomb.

[(Anonymous)]

The reason that I have a problem with it is that WMD is a modern phrase and it's not entirely clear to me how to make sense of it in a medieval context. Sure, on a medieval scale, you could say that a dragon is comparatively a weapon of mass destruction. But does that justify comparing it to a nuclear weapon? Just because you call it a WMD compared to other weapons available to medieval people, does that mean that it has the same moral problems as a nuclear weapon or chemical warfare? I don't know if that's actually the case. It seems like a confusing analogy.

[philstar22]

I agree. And I don't think you can entirely judge a medieval sort of setting by modern morals anyway.

[ninefox]

the first arms control ban in history in the west was a papal decree banning the use of cross bows as dishonorable weapon in like the 1300s

medieval people were *perfectly* capable of recognizing that different kinds of weapons had different lethalities and different ethical dimensions

WMD also includes things like bio and chemical weapons, not just nuclear. including, like, napalm and other defoliants, or mustard gas. You don't have to kill x number of people or ruin a city in one go to count as a WMD, just be meaningfully different from other/common weapons. A dragon definitely counts as WMD.

[(Anonymous)]

Same. I think it's weird to call a sentient being a weapon.

[philstar22]

Yup. If you are going to make a comparison to something from today, I'd go with something like violent dogs trained to fight or something. Still wouldn't make a comparison to a fantasy creature. But at least it makes more sense than comparing a dragon to a WMD.

[(Anonymous)]

Dogs are considered weapons when used to attack.

[tabaqui]

I think so, too. It's not like a nuke, or biological or gas weapons. There is no lingering effect, no drifting of radiation for miles and miles, no children being born with...i dunno...dragon scales or something.

I just kills people in a truly gross and horrible and slow way.

And the opposing forces *do* have a chance of killing it, unlike gas or a nuke.

[(Anonymous)]

Machine guns were once considered WMDs. So were cannons (particularly the ones used by Germany in WWI). There are a lot of weapons today that are considered WMDs that won't have "lingering effects."

[(Anonymous)]

Eh. Her ancestors did it. Her stunt with her dragon on the battlefield wasn't shit compared to the Field of Fire.

[(Anonymous)]

I think part of the issue is that Daenerys is such a divisive character. Her haters will drag the conversation off into idiocy, and her stans will refuse to acknowledge negative aspects of her character. (blah, blah, "not all haters/fans" blah blah).

I love her character, but do admit that the dragons are fantastical weapons of destruction and should not exist. The scene of them attacking the Lannister army is actually disgusting. But trying to have that discussion in the GoT fandom (the book fans bow out of show discussions) is just a waste of time and effort.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Jesus. I didn't think people would take WMD so literally. Sorry.

"...discussion about how Dany brought a weapon that is so much more devastating and powerful than literally anything that 99% of that world has seen, that she was able to wipe out an entire army in a flash in much the same way modern WMDs such as machine guns/poison gas in WWI, nuclear weapons in WWII, and hydrogen weapons today to a battle..."

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

Dragons are cool. Sorry about it.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

I think you're dead right and most people in this thread don't know much about WMD OR medieval history of warfare

I mean, literally plague corpses were used as a WMD/bioweapons in the medieval period. Also I've never been as enchanted with Danny as most fans.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

THIIIISSSS.

I mean, no, a dragon isn't going to kill as many people as a nuke, but I mean, you have to adjust for the time period.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

OK.

Fair.

I guess my problem is, my problem with nuclear weapons has never been the fact that they're more powerful than other available weapons. My problem with them is that they're horrifyingly deadly - because of how much harm they do. The same with things like poison gas: they do a particularly insidious and deadly kind of harm. And I don't know if the same is true of dragons.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

...did you now see the Loot Train Battle? https://youtu.be/AUhFO8xtW5k

Re: OP

[tabaqui]

Okay, that's gross. If it had been really, really, really *intense* fire, that killed instantly, i wouldn't have been put off by it so much. But it just lit up the soldiers in their metal and leather and cooked them while they struggled, and that's gross as hell.

[nightscale]

Sorry I'm just here for the cool dragons burning things.

[(Anonymous)]

To me, for all the "realism," Game of Thrones/ASOIAF are still fantasy. And I'm really just much more willing to accept violence from heroes in a fictional world where magic/supernatural things exist. Come on, we're talking about dragons.

[(Anonymous)]

like most wars, there's evil on both sides.

[(Anonymous)]

This. There's nothing noble about wars and killing.

[(Anonymous)]

In my fandom corner there was an ongoing fight for MONTHS about this actually. People got really heated about how Dany is now as bad as her grandfather and stuff. It was super annoying, so I wish I had been in your fandom corner OP!