Reblogging myself today
Nazi Christmas ornaments… how fucked up is that…
Just bought the #Taxidermy DEVO Raccoon because I NEEDED IT. Damn you, Etsy.
WHAT KIND OF AD IS THIS
A REALLY EFFECTIVE ONE SAVE THE FROGSSAVE THE GODDAMN FROGS
SAVE THE FROGS HOLY SHIT SAVE THE FROGS
Frogs are right up there with bats and bees. Super essential to the ecosystem of our planet.
I may or may not be contemplating plans to surround my entire house with a solid moat of frogs.
1455. "Explain to me why it is more noble to kill ten thousand men in battle than a dozen at dinner." Because with that one sentence Tywin Lannister did the impossible: he legitimately justified the Red Wedding.
Submitted by renlytargaryen
I was gonna let this go, because I don’t even read these books, but then I saw there was a shitstorm so I figured I might as well wade in. Because I don’t think Tywin’s challenge is particularly difficult to answer.
It is more noble to kill 10,000 soldiers in battle than a dozen wedding guests because the soldiers have some awareness that you will try to kill them. That’s why they, y’know, thought to bring 10,000 guys with them. We’re basically talking about the moral difference between shooting a man in a duel and shooting an unarmed man in the back. A five-year-old could understand this distinction.
Certainly it is easier to kill a dozen people at dinner than an entire army, and it is arguably more efficient to launch a surprise decapitation strike than a direct assault. But that doesn’t have anything to do with whether one tactic is more noble than the other. I can appreciate that Tywin believes the Red Wedding has deftly ended a rebellion, so I can see why he doesn’t much care. But his indifference does not determine whether one course of action is more honorable than another. If I shoot an unarmed man in the back, I might be able to justify my actions, but not to the same extent that I can justify shooting a man who is presently trying to shoot me.
I suppose Tywin’s point is that it ought to be more noble to end a war by violating hospitium than to prolong it with “honorable” combat. However, to accept this logic means embracing its logical extreme: Explain to me why it is more noble to kill a dozen men at dinner than to, say, smother Tywin Lannister in his sleep.
I assume Tywin’s response to that predicament would be to Red Wedding everybody else before they can Red Wedding him. But that’s not a rebuttal to the point, it’s just a siege mentality. The Hand of the King (or whatever Tywin is, idgaf) can afford to play that game only because he happens to have the most power and so forth. It comes down to “It doesn’t matter if we fight fair, but I’m the only one who gets to cheat.” That’s not even remotely noble; it’s third-grade playground bullshit.
Here is a relevant Google image search result: