87 replies to this topic

[Toccs]

Castel, on 14 June 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

What signs were these?

The fact that Balon had already died and the majority of the Ironborn had abandoned their northern conquets to return to the Kingsmoot.  The garrison of Moat Cailin was at that stage only a few dozen men and the Crannogmen were slowly poisoning them with darts.  Robb's plan to retake Moat Cailin would almost certainly have succeeded, after that the only Ironborn left in the North would have been Asha's small force at Deepwoord Motte and we saw how easily they were defeated.

Edited by Toccs, 15 June 2012 - 12:05 AM.

[Castel]

Toccs, on 15 June 2012 - 12:04 AM, said:

The fact that Balon had already died and the majority of the Ironborn had abandoned their northern conquets to return to the Kingsmoot.  The garrison of Moat Cailin was at that stage only a few dozen men and the Crannogmen were slowly poisoning them with darts.  Robb's plan to retake Moat Cailin would almost certainly have succeeded, after that the only Ironborn left in the North would have been Asha's small force at Deepwoord Motte and we saw how easily they were defeated.

Oh, fair enough. I was assuming that you were talking about taking Moat Cailin fully garrisoned.

[RickonTheBAMF]

Context: Balon was as much driven by a desire to avenge himself on the Starks as he was for conquest. He was tactically shrewd: the Starks were heavily engaged to the south, so what better chance did he have of poking them in the eye than when all his garrisons were defended by the sick, lame, and crazies? Granted, sacking Lannisport would have made more sense from a perspective of pure gain, but it would have been a favor to Robb and I don't think he could have stomached that after he saw his two elder and more capable sons die by the swords of landsmen.

[IKE]

The Fallen, on 14 June 2012 - 11:59 PM, said:

   If you're saying that the invasion of the Ironborn was such a disaster for Robb and the North that it got Robb killed, then how was Roose expecting to take back the North? If it weakened Robb so much then how does Roose fair when he has even fewer men, after killing most of Robb's and Edmure's troops? It doesn't make sense. Was Roose willing to allow the Ironborne to remain in the North?

The north was abandoned after Balon's death, Moat Cailan was abandoned after Balon's death.  I'm not suggested the iron islanders succeeded in claiming the north.  As wrote pages ago their follow-up was poorly executed.  But I am highlighting the military importance and repercussions of ironborn taking Moat Cailan and the north losing it.  It set up the precedent for Robb's defeat.

He was the king without a kingdom.  He would of made it to the Rock and Lannisport but he had to abandon his campaign, he would still have Jaime Lannister, Karstark loyalty, a betrothal to a Frey.  

There's nothing contradicting in recognizing the strategic impact in cutting the Riverlands off from the North.    

Quote

How was the defeat guaranteed?

Because the neck is appropriately named.  It was an exposed artery that once snapped, Robb's kingdom collapse.  No the iron islanders weren't involved in every scheme that brought Robb down, but their actions set the precedent for everything else to happen.  Roose says as much to Theon.

[LordDolorousEdd]

i thought the idea was to get some land... if they attacked the west then tywin would have taken it back quickly but the north on the other hand was rebeling as well against the crown so there was a chance it would lead to them keeping it.

[Mummer's Fart]

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

The north was abandoned after Balon's death, Moat Cailan was abandoned after Balon's death.  I'm not suggested the iron islanders succeeded in claiming the north.  As wrote pages ago their follow-up was poorly executed.  But I am highlighting the military importance and repercussions of ironborn taking Moat Cailan and the north losing it.  It set up the precedent for Robb's defeat.

That's not what the word "precedent" means.

Even at full strength, the Ironborn could not have hoped to hold Moat Cailin. House Reed was wearing them down and Robb was to flank them while the Greatjon hit them head on.. Even if the attack from the south had failed, it would only take a small army of reserves from the North to rout them.

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

He was the king without a kingdom.  He would of made it to the Rock and Lannisport but he had to abandon his campaign, he would still have Jaime Lannister, Karstark loyalty, a betrothal to a Frey.  

He lost Winterfell and the eastern shores of the North. Rodrik Cassel was still perfectly capable of taking all that back with his 2,000 man reserves. Losing Moat Cailin did not lose him the Kingslayer, Karstark loyalty or the Frey betrothal. Robb was still betrothed to a Frey when Bolton and the Freys were conspiring against him. It was the Battle of the Blackwater that lost him their loyalty, the betrothal was merely a pretext.

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

Because the neck is appropriately named.  It was an exposed artery that once snapped, Robb's kingdom collapse.  No the iron islanders weren't involved in every scheme that brought Robb down, but their actions set the precedent for everything else to happen.  Roose says as much to Theon.

That's still not what the word "precedent" means. The ironborn made it easier for Roose sure, but it's quite clear that Robb was to be betrayed by his lords of Bolton and Frey even if the ironborn had stayed home and Robb never married a Westerling.

[IKE]

I regret not having the book on hand to cite the text that clearly illuminates the point of origin of Bolton and Freys betrayal.

It is in an Arya chapter when she's serving as Roose's cub-bearer.  She comes across his squire and helps him clean his lord's chainmail.  The boy is upset because he just found out he cannot marry his lady.  The lady in question was Arya Stark.  He is the Frey she was supposed to marry according to the contract Catelyn and Walder decided on.  Freys were concerned that Robb marching back north left Harrenhal exposed, KL unchecked.  (Robb would still be in the westerlands otherwise).  They wanted Bolton to treat with the Lannisters.  I understand the significance of the results of Blackwater, but it would not have been such a concern had Robb not needed to tucker tail between his legs back north.  Then Freys and company head off to hunt wolves (foreshadow and motif).

Rodrik could not be everywhere at once, as Theon's march into Winterfell clearly demonstrates.  Had Theon not been a north sympathizer the city would have been sacked and Robbs heirs held as hostages on Pyke (again, the original plan had merit, the follow-through is where it fell short).

And again, in ADWD, Roose tells Theon: "I should thank you, Robb's cause was lost the day you took Winterfell."  

Quote

That's still not what the word "precedent" means. The ironborn made it easier for Roose sure, but it's quite clear that Robb was to be betrayed by his lords of Bolton and Frey even if the ironborn had stayed home and Robb never married a Westerling.

Where in the text is this suggested?  I know about the wiki pages talking about Bolton avoiding losses of his own men during the battle at the fork, that's hard sale for betrayal.  Yes, misused the word precedent, blame it on the fact I've completely run out of synonyms to describe Robb's doom once Cailan is taken.  His cause is lost the moment it's foundation was cut out from beneath it's legs.  I'm surprised this has turned out to be such a hard sell to so many.

[Mummer's Fart]

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

I regret not having the book on hand to cite the text that clearly illuminates the point of origin of Bolton and Freys betrayal.

It is in an Arya chapter when she's serving as Roose's cub-bearer.  She comes across his squire and helps him clean his lord's chainmail.  The boy is upset because he just found out he cannot marry his lady.  The lady in question was Arya Stark.  He is the Frey she was supposed to marry according to the contract Catelyn and Walder decided on.  Freys were concerned that Robb marching back north left Harrenhal exposed, KL unchecked.  (Robb would still be in the westerlands otherwise).  They wanted Bolton to treat with the Lannisters.  I understand the significance of the results of Blackwater, but it would not have been such a concern had Robb not needed to tucker tail between his legs back north.  Then Freys and company head off to hunt wolves (foreshadow and motif).

Blackwater dealt a severe blow to Northern prospects and the loyalty of Boltons and Freys. Bolton and Freys, in the very same scene, agreed that the Young Wolf's war was lost by Stannis on the Blackwater.

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Rodrik could not be everywhere at once, as Theon's march into Winterfell clearly demonstrates.  Had Theon not been a north sympathizer the city would have been sacked and Robbs heirs held as hostages on Pyke (again, the original plan had merit, the follow-through is where it fell short).

Just as Rodrik could not be everywhere, nor could bands of sea-faring reavers conquer and subdue the North without direct outside help from the Iron Throne, which would never have happened so long as Balon was calling himself king.
Certainly Theon did not take he hostages as he should have, but Balon never told Theon to do anything more than rape fishwives to begin with. It's not as though Theon failed to follow through on a plan that never was, and it certainly had nothing to do with Balon's planning.

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

And again, in ADWD, Roose tells Theon: "I should thank you, Robb's cause was lost the day you took Winterfell."  

This is entirely negated by earlier statements by the Freys and Boltons claiming that Stannis' loss ruined their hopes, it is from that point (Blackwater) that the two houses decided they were on the wrong side of the war.

IKE, on 15 June 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

[/background][/left][/font][/color]
Where in the text is this suggested?  I know about the wiki pages talking about Bolton avoiding losses of his own men during the battle at the fork, that's hard sale for betrayal.  Yes, misused the word precedent, blame it on the fact I've completely run out of synonyms to describe Robb's doom once Cailan is taken.  His cause is lost the moment it's foundation was cut out from beneath it's legs.  I'm surprised this has turned out to be such a hard sell to so many.

"pretext" is maybe what you're looking for.

And I don't know where in the text. In one of the chapters shortly after the Battle of Blackwater you'll find it. He wasn't doomed at any point until he set foot in the Twins in good faith.

It's a tough sell because it's clear that he could have retaken Moat Cailin, that Rodrik's reserves could retake the lost Northern strongholds, House Reed was already wearing down the ironmen at Moat Cailin.

The point is, no Balon's plan was total crap. He had no avenue for alliance or cooperation from the Iron Throne and warred on the only potential ally who could have been any use. Whatsmore, he had no feasible means of holding any solid ground in the North. It was foolish beyond hope of success, so you can't even call it risky. Doomed is a better adjective.