Game of Thrones begins....

[Martinus]

I don't think that was especially important.  The First Men did a good job of dealing with the bad guys without any of those things.

Again, same applies to Stannis and his "red witch". Westeros do not need them and their crazy religion.

[The Larch]

Stannis strikes me as a pretty serious "means to an end" kind of guy. His morality and sense of justice is driven by results, and if the results are "moral" than the means to achieve those results matter little.

Yup, he says so himself when he tells the story of his childhood when he stopped using his falcon because he wouldn't hunt as a comparison to him ditching the Seven for R'hlor.

[Solmyr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-3POYx6IeeI

I'm now going to imagine Tywin saying "stop your kinky fuckery" to Tyrion every time they talk.

[Neil]

I don't think that was especially important.  The First Men did a good job of dealing with the bad guys without any of those things.

Again, same applies to Stannis and his "red witch". Westeros do not need them and their crazy religion.

Stannis isn't really a religious man.

Besides, it's not like the worship of Melisandre's fire demon is worse than the worship of the Seven Andal Gods.

[Neil]

And Stannis is burning loyal men who just wanted him to get his crazy witch to stop destroying their holy statues and sending their sons into insane battles.

History is written by victors. If Stannis loses, it is really hard to see him depicted as anything else than a mad tyrant who blasphemes against the gods of old.

He's not burning religious opponents though.  He didn't burn Davos.  Of course history will frown on losers.  That's what happens to losers.

[Valmy]

Of course history will frown on losers.  That's what happens to losers.

Eh History has been kind to many losers.  It depends.  The whole 'History is written by the victors' thing sort of depends on the losers being exterminated...otherwise they tend to hang around annoyingly writing Lost Cause literature.

[Viking]

Of course history will frown on losers.  That's what happens to losers.

Eh History has been kind to many losers.  It depends.  The whole 'History is written by the victors' thing sort of depends on the losers being exterminated...otherwise they tend to hang around annoyingly writing Lost Cause literature.

There was a tipping point with that trope that came with Jubal Early. For the first time, rather than being butchered and/or reflecting over the causes of their own failure they just bitched and complained suggesting that the other side cheated by having more men or better material. Since we stopped butchering the leaders of the losers all they have done is write history. The winners are busy making it.

Today every single Marxist out there is either a historian or a journalist. Today history is written by the losers.

[garbon]

Today every single Marxist out there is either a historian or a journalist. Today history is written by the losers.

Your statement might be fair if there was no one from the West writing history.

[Viking]

Today every single Marxist out there is either a historian or a journalist. Today history is written by the losers.

Your statement might be fair if there was no one from the West writing history.

You did notice that my phrasing was "every .. marxist ... is .. a historian or a journalist." not "every .. historian or journalist ... is ... a marxist."

I might have added "village idiot" since every single community seems to have it's own unrepentant marxist.

[garbon]

Today every single Marxist out there is either a historian or a journalist. Today history is written by the losers.

Your statement might be fair if there was no one from the West writing history.

You did notice that my phrasing was "every .. marxist ... is .. a historian or a journalist." not "every .. historian or journalist ... is ... a marxist."

I might have added "village idiot" since every single community seems to have it's own unrepentant marxist.

Exactly which is why the statement - "Today history is written by the losers" is inaccurate in the context of the oft repeated phrase. 

[jimmy olsen]

Dragon spoilers!

http://winteriscoming.net/2013/04/vfx-supervisor-talks-creating-the-dragons/

[Neil]

Is it really a spoiler?

[Viking]

Today every single Marxist out there is either a historian or a journalist. Today history is written by the losers.

Your statement might be fair if there was no one from the West writing history.

You did notice that my phrasing was "every .. marxist ... is .. a historian or a journalist." not "every .. historian or journalist ... is ... a marxist."

I might have added "village idiot" since every single community seems to have it's own unrepentant marxist.

Exactly which is why the statement - "Today history is written by the losers" is inaccurate in the context of the oft repeated phrase.

I'd go into detail about definite and indefinite articles but that would really be pedantic. I'll see if you figure it out...

[Admiral Yi]

He's got a point Puff.  History is a mass noun, so it's undefined in your statement "Today history is written by the losers" whether you're referring to some or all history.  Clearly not all history is being written by the losers.

[Viking]

He's got a point Puff.  History is a mass noun, so it's undefined in your statement "Today history is written by the losers" whether you're referring to some or all history.  Clearly not all history is being written by the losers.

Did you understand my initial point as I intended it or as he misrepresents it?