Draco and Dumbledore LONG, beware

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 160220

Carol
<snip> *Not* concentrating on the UV is not an
> action. It's more inaction, which is what you seem to find so
abhorrent. I guess you think he sould have let the UV kill Snape but
I'm asking what he could have done *without* danger to Snape (or to
Draco). And I have yet to see a suggestion that would have prevented
the DEs from getting into Hogwarts without activating the UV.
> >
> > What, exactly, could Dumbledore have done without antagonizing
Draco, provoking him into a failed murder attempt (which DD would
have to deflect) and consequently killing Snape, on whom DD, like it
or not, depends?
> >
> > What additional protections could he have put in place to protect
the students? I can't think of a single one. What further
investigations could he have made? He says that he knows more than
Harry does. Why doubt him? <snip>
> >

>
> Alla:
>
> It seems to me that the problem is the answer which I can give is not
> going to be satisfactory for you,
> so I guess there is no reason to wait for it, and no concentrating
> all his efforts on protecting students and **not** protecting
> somebody who swore to finish him off if Draco fails ( we do remember
> what is that UV that Dumbledore supposedly is obligated to protect
> Snape dear from - Snape dear agrees to fulfill Dumbledore's death
> warrant), is not inaction, but exactly the action which I would want
> him to take.
>
> Let me repeat it -
>
> Dumbledore. Should. Not. Have. Taken. UV. In consideration. At all.
>
> and let Snape to his fate, if that means death, too bad.
>
> Maybe in another life he would think twice before taking UV to finish
> off his mentor.
>
> I believe that there was quite a chance that Dumbledore could have
> persuaded Draco to take the deal he offers him on the Tower, in fact
> without DE around, I believe he would have more chances.
>
> So I believe in my hypothetical the only one for whom things
> definitely look grim is Snape ( although anything can happen, but
> everybody else had a pretty good chance of beating tough luck,
> everybody but Snape)
>
> JMO of course,
>
> Alla, who has no problem with anybody finding her answers
> unsatisfactory, but who absolutely finds problematic the implication
> that I do not suggest any course of action for Dumbledore when mine
> just ignores the fate of Snape dear.
>
Carol again:

So you blame Dumbledore for protecting Snape, whom he believed to be
trustworthy and on whom he relied for help? You're seeing Snape in
hindsight. Try seeing him through Dumbledore's eyes.

Also, he could protect Snape and protect the students at the same
time, which, IMO, he did.

How would confronting Draco solve the problem and end the danger to
the school? Voldemort knows about the Vanishing Cabinet now. He could
order Theo Nott to fix it.

What makes you think that DD wasn't protecting the students? Again,
leaving Draco and Snape aside, what more could he do to protect
*them*? I'd say they were pretty well protected as it was once Snape
stopped the random cursed and poisoned objects from coming in.

Carol, who doesn't need to have answers spelled out one word at a
time, thank you, and is still looking for what DD could *actively*
have done that he didn't do *aside from* confronting Draco and
setting off the UV