Would DD try to make Harry capable of Unforgivables? (was: Portrait!DD)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 137912

> SSSusan:
<SNIP>

> I know an AK is an AK to many of you.  To me, Snape's was seen as 
> *necessary* by the person upon whom it would be utilized, and that 
> makes it somehow "different."  As for DD actually asking Snape to 
do 
> something which might tear a bit of Snape's soul, I'm banking on 
> this "different" kind of AK not doing that.  Or elsewise, that it 
was a 
> price Snape had to pay for the good of the Order.
> 

Alla:

I think there is very good reason why JKR called those three curses " 
Unforgivables"

So far she did not give ( IMO only of course) any indication in the 
books that under some circumstances " Unforgivables" could be 
forgiven.

Even when aurors were given permission to perform them, remember how 
unsympathetic  the narrator's voice is to the person who gave such 
authorization.

At the same time, we learn that real Moody always always tried to 
bring bad guys to captive alive.

I doubt that JKR would portray DD to be the person similar to Barty.

Sure, soldier under order can be excused, sort of, but what does it  
say about the general giving such an order?

I don't want to think of Dumbledore that way. I would rather think of 
him as one who trusted unconditionally and was betrayed in that. :-)

I don't think we have any other example in the books, where use of 
Unforgivables was somehow justified, do we?


As someone pointed out even card on Dumbledore does not say "killed 
Grindelwald", it says defeated him. 

Well, of course just my opinion.


Alla, who usually agrees with SSSusan, but on this matter quite 
strongly disagrees with her.