Skip to main content
23 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 16, 2019 at 10:20 comment added Paul D. Waite “it's a war crime in our culture, in-universe it doesn't seem to be such a deplorable action” — doesn’t it? Who, exactly, in-universe is saying hey, human shields, cool, no problem.
May 16, 2019 at 2:50 review Close votes
May 16, 2019 at 5:02
S May 16, 2019 at 0:47 history suggested Alec CC BY-SA 4.0
cleaned up english
May 15, 2019 at 23:54 review Suggested edits
S May 16, 2019 at 0:47
May 15, 2019 at 20:22 answer added M. A. Golding timeline score: 5
May 15, 2019 at 19:40 answer added Harry Johnston timeline score: 4
May 15, 2019 at 16:11 history became hot network question
May 15, 2019 at 13:07 comment added delinear @lukas84 potentially, yes. Do you think the Targaryen supporters would call him a tyrant? Maybe, it's at least likely. Would Dany call him a tyrant? Certainly. So I'm pretty sure the answer is always going to be subjective. In any case, Robert's tenuous claim to the throne was still likely stronger than Cersei's seemingly non-existent claim.
May 15, 2019 at 12:45 comment added lukas84 @delinear Seizing the throne for yourself is what Robert Baratheon did. Should we call him a tyrant too?
May 15, 2019 at 12:41 comment added lukas84 @JAD But it's a war crime in our culture, in-universe it doesn't seem to be such a deplorable action.
May 15, 2019 at 11:49 comment added delinear She seized the throne for herself, it's unclear whether she had the authority to do that. Seizing and holding the throne for yourself seems pretty tyrannical, regardless of what her reign after that was like.
May 15, 2019 at 11:43 comment added user1129682 One does not simply blow up a cathedral in the middle of a densly populated city without immediate casualties outside the cathedral.
May 15, 2019 at 11:31 comment added Paul D. Waite “strictly speaking, they were not her responsibility to protect” — technically, you seem to be saying, she's not a tyrant. “she has been using the people in King's Landing has human shields; but again, she is not harming them directly” — nothing wrong with human shields!
May 15, 2019 at 11:27 comment added Aegon @TheLethalCarrot Well eventually she or her successor will have to pay back the interest and the original. Which means more taxes. Which means poorer living conditions for the people. So it all comes down to the people getting the business end no matter who lends or raises the money
May 15, 2019 at 11:25 comment added TheLethalCarrot @xdtTransform I know, the Iron Bank loaned her the money in Season 7, that's my point, that's how she could afford the GC.
May 15, 2019 at 11:24 comment added xdtTransform @TheLethalCarrot, Lannester is almost bankrupt. The realm is basically the only ressource left.
May 15, 2019 at 11:24 comment added JAD "Then she has been using the people in King's Landing has human shields; but again, she is not harming them directly." There is a reason this is a war-crime.
May 15, 2019 at 11:23 comment added TheLethalCarrot @xdtTransform FWIW the money for the war mostly came from the Iron Bank but I'm sure she also raised taxes.
May 15, 2019 at 11:22 comment added xdtTransform War is expensive. Money have to come from somewhere. Food has to be taken from someone else. Starvation and taxes may be enought to qualify for the lower tier of tyrany. Cut few heads, burn a Church or two and you start to have sothing solid.
May 15, 2019 at 11:22 answer added TheLethalCarrot timeline score: 11
May 15, 2019 at 11:21 history edited TheLethalCarrot CC BY-SA 4.0
added 3 characters in body
May 15, 2019 at 11:20 review First posts
May 15, 2019 at 11:21
May 15, 2019 at 11:15 history asked lukas84 CC BY-SA 4.0