fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4857 ]

[ SECRET POST #4857 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4857 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 11 secrets from Secret Submission Post #694.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

lol my thoughts exactly.

They lost their first argument over Anakin's killing spree, waited a few months and figured they would give it another shot.

My favorite part about her is how she always give up (usually once people start asking her to justify killing babies and toddlers when Dany could have brought down one building and won) because there is no good reason to support what Dany did. Think next time she'll argue the same stuff

When have I given up?

Sorry, your reddit memes are so on point. Sort of like Dany was at the end there. Get it? Cuz she was stabbed!

Yup, every time!

Though I do have to admit, crying about the poor little Nazi children is a new thing

Lol. I have to admit, cheering the death of children is a new thing.

“They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.”

What did the toddler and infants reap? Can you explain in a list what sins they committed?

Were toddlers and infants deliberately targeted?

Answer the question. You said the people of King's Landing deserved to be massacred. What did the toddlers and infants do?

Are you not aware that quote came from Arthur Harris, talking about bombing Germany?

"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Rotterdam, London, Warsaw, and half a hundred other places, they put their rather naive theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind."

Answer the question. You said the people of King's Landing deserved to be massacred. What did the toddlers and infants do?

nayrt

This OP is batshit obsessed with Dany. They will never respond to reason or rational argument.

I'm not AYRT, and I don't actually agree with AYRT, but you're being an ass. AYRT is clearly saying that, in war, sometimes innocents become collateral damage. They don't have to have done anything, personally, to "deserve" to be collateral damage. It's war, and they're part of a nation that entered a war. Basically, thems the breaks.

I'm not so cavalier about collateral damage myself. But AYRT is not the one refusing to have a discussion here - you are.

Wrong. They have repeatedly said that everyone deserved to die because they were bad or loyal to Cersei. Including the children. So want to know What she thinks the babies and toddlers did.

nayrt or op, but the reason they don't answer you is because this is a stupid red herring argument. I'm sure if Dany could have taken the time to send someone in and fling the babies and toddlers to a safe spot while she razed everything else, she might have done so. But babies and toddlers are wholly dependent and would be in the arms of the awful people that deserved to die, so, they die. They're collateral damage. A thing that occurs in literally every war in the history of any world.

No one on Earth would ever argue that yes, clearly the babies and toddlers were also complicit and they themselves deserved to die; that's stupid. That's pointless. Why would you even pretend that this is a thing that anyone would actually say?

That’s only a red herring if you think that Dany’s murder spree was so morally justified that a bunch of dead babies were acceptable collateral. Otherwise, asking why you think it’s okay that a bunch of children had to be set on fire for the glorification of Dany is a reasonable question. The fact that you can’t come up with a reason other than that their parents were bad and a big baby fire was the only way to deal with them is... telling.

Dany’s an irredeemable, innocent civilian-slaughtering monster and the only sad part of her death was that it didn’t happen earlier. Anyone who can’t see that must have got too much toddler corpse smoke in their eyes.

No, if they killed Dany earlier then they would have had to take over King's Landing themselves and get their own hands dirty instead of having her do it for them so they could swoop in after and reap the rewards guilt-free.

Are you talking about the Starks? The Starks had no reason to march on King's Landing at all until they were obligated to by Jon kneeling to Dany. They didn't want to take over King's Landing, they wanted to maintain their independence. Which they could have done by holding out against Cersei in the North, not invading King's Landing.

Shush, you. If you don't play along with the fact that King's Landing had to be obliterated for the good of humanity, Dany's just a bloodthirsty monster who needed to be put down like a rabid dog. And that can't be true.

Then why did Sansa tell Tyrion about Jon?

Because a) she didn't think Dany would be a good queen (though I don't think she guessed exactly how dangerous she was going to be), and b) Jon on the Iron Throne is preferable to Dany. It would mean a king in the South who she could trust to be a good king and in all likelihood an independent North. It wasn't at all her ideal scenario --- see how distressed she was at the thought of Jon going South permanently with Dany ("I don't want him to go down there. The men in my family don't do well in the capital.").

But at that point, she was caught between a rock and a hard place. She could sit by and do nothing, and let things play out, which would likely result in another bad ruler on the Iron Throne, with the North under her boot and Jon gone from home. Or she could try to exploit the very real doubts Dany's supporters had about her and have them switch their support over to Jon, who is not only the rightful Targaryen heir but a good and trustworthy person in her eyes. She was going to lose Jon to the South either way, but in the latter scenario he would have allies to support his claim against Dany.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4857 ]

+1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1

Re: +1