Bright Blue Eyes Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Oh, you've read books 6-8 have you? Tell me what happens to Tyrion while you're at it. No, I have read history books. Like the fact that some of the causes of the "ethnic cleansing" happening during the Yugoslawian civil wars were rooted in popular war crimes from the Middle Ages. Like the fact that three-quarter of the reason WWII started was the (very unfair) treaty of Versailles and it's repercushions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 No, I have read history books. Like the fact that some of the causes of the "ethnic cleansing" happening during the Yugoslawian civil wars were rooted in popular war crimes from the Middle Ages. Like the fact that three-quarter of the reason WWII started was the (very unfair) treaty of Versailles and it's repercushions. And you appear to have picked up an extremely simplistic view of the causes of conflict from them. Grievance on account of past wrongs (real and imagined, cough, Versailles) is one reason fresh conflict can arise, sometimes a very potent one, but it will depend on many other circumstances. Your claim, on this thread, is that the RW will inevitably lead to a genocidal northern campaign against the South (and maybe the west in particular) and you are not convincing people. So, I ask again, have you read books 6-8? edit: just to say I very strongly disagree Versailles was unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 You make some good points, but I still feel that the ending of the war in Riverlands is worth something. The destruction was just so bad, so it's hard to imagine how much worse it could be had the war continued. Does this mean that the RW should have happened, I would say No, as even though it was beneficial for the Riverlands, it was both morally objectionable and caused more wars at a later point. But considering it did happen, you have to consider some positive effects it caused. Ending the war would be worth something. Genuine, sustainable peace would be worth something. The Red Wedding accomplished none of that, though. Contrary, it generated a whole new bunch of fresh scores to settle. River lords are out for revenge (no, not just the northmen were wronged). There will be more blood, and the RW is the reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Prince of Dorne Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Uh no, because the Starks were heading North to reclaim their lands and rule from there anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Prince of Dorne Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 The North Remembers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelittledragonthatcould Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 The North Remembers Sure it does. Remind me, just how many times have the Boltons destroyed Winterfell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Prince of Dorne Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sure it does. Remind me, just how many times have the Boltons destroyed Winterfell? I don't know, enough times to lead to the future extinction of their house, I presume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Tsarevich Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sure it does. Remind me, just how many times have the Boltons destroyed Winterfell? Well, they were still kings in their own right two first times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I don't know, enough times to lead to the future extinction of their house, I presume. I don't think the Boltons are walking away from this one not this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barty Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Has the OP seen the future?? So, how can he say that the RW has created lasting peace?? All it has done is create a lull in the fighting. Do people really think that the North will forget and forgive?? The next time the Starks and Lannisters fight there will be no peace, there will be no bargaining, there will be no prisoners or hostages - it will be kill or be killed. A war much bloodier than the one Robb fought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barty Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sure it does. Remind me, just how many times have the Boltons destroyed Winterfell? And did the Kings of Winter forget the Red Kings burning Winterfell?? They ultimately beat the Dreadfort and made the Red Kings swear fealty. Only this time the Starks wont be satisfied with bent knees, will they?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lykaios Wolfsheart Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Sure it does. Remind me, just how many times have the Boltons destroyed Winterfell? The Winter Kings pretty much destroyed the Red Kings the first time. This time around, it isn't just Winterfell that has been targeted. The entirety of the North lost family and friends at the massacre of the Red Wedding, that's what the North bloody remembers and that is why Bolton IS going to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelittledragonthatcould Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Has the OP seen the future?? So, how can he say that the RW has created lasting peace?? All it has done is create a lull in the fighting. Do people really think that the North will forget and forgive?? The next time the Starks and Lannisters fight there will be no peace, there will be no bargaining, there will be no prisoners or hostages - it will be kill or be killed. A war much bloodier than the one Robb fought. And did the Kings of Winter forget the Red Kings burning Winterfell?? They ultimately beat the Dreadfort and made the Red Kings swear fealty. Only this time the Starks wont be satisfied with bent knees, will they?? Have you seen the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee-Sensei Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 @Mladen The Red Wedding is universally disliked in Westeros. The Freys? Not really. Certainly they're seen as untrustworthy, but they were seen as untrustworthy before the RW too. They aren't hated for doing it. And I find it hard to believe that in some 8,000 to 6,000 years of Westerosi history, no one had broken guest rights before. With that said... the RW will probably just lead to a revenge massare by Stark loyalists long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Rebuilding of two places in the Riverlands by the cunts who helped ravage it in the first place does not constitute "peace in the Riverlands." Because of the RW, there can't be peace in the Riverlands for a long time, and probably all of Westeros. It's easy to be a contrarian and believe the bullshit that Tywin was spewing, but during his defense of his actions even Tyrion was sitting there judging him and his poor reasoning. Not to mention it is intermixed with talk of what Tywin and Gregor did to Elia Martell and her children, and in the very next book we see how a "necessary and pragmatic" act like splatting a baby boy's brains on a wall and stabbing a toddler girl over fifty times, has created an enemy for him down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee-Sensei Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 ^That's because he didn't finish the job. Notice how the Reynes and Tarbecks aren't coming back. Had he wiped them all out, it wouldn't have been a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 And he didn't wipe all the Starks and Stark loyalists out, as the ADWD northern arc makes clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee-Sensei Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 ^He did wipe out all the Starks though. He had no idea other Starks were around. Benjen was missing. Sansa was married to Tyrion. Robb died. Arya was believed to be dead at that point. And Bran and Rickon died at Winterfell. There's no way he could have known they were still around. As for the rest of them... they had a bunch of hostages and a much more powerful army. It's easy to see why he'd think it was a good idea to RW the Starks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dragons Hand Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 In the extremely short term.What you've done is create an undying blood-feud between Robb's entire kingdom and the Westerland's.And the North isn't done yet, and when they return honor is going to come after bloody vengeance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Jon Snow wasn't gone either, and though Tywin made some sort of plans to deal with the Wall, it wasn't the Reyne/Tarbeck situation, and even if he thought so he still hasn't done anything about the surviving Northmen who will fight for Robb and Ned's memory. Plus, there still is that whole "Others" thing that people have pointed out. His plans for the North dealing with the Wilding invasion inadvertantly comes with the ice demon and spider hoard. Crazy that by thinking he could end a war with a quick dinner, Tywin might have ensured humanity's downfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.