the trees have eyes

TBH, I see it more as a positive for Tywin. He can get Joffrey to dismiss / honourably discharge Jaime from the KG and lo and behold he has the heir to Casterly Rock that Aerys robbed him of so many years ago. Plus he can marry Jaime to Sansa which aggrandises his House and keeps the Tyrells from becoming too powerful. I don't think he would do Tyrion any harm but I don't think he would mourn him much. Unless Sansa herself was the poisoner (as per @Frey family reunion's thread). But how could the planners have anticipated her active involvement indeed, it's quite a gamble on their part if they did.

The seas are calm and we're set fair, cap'n, not an iceberg within a hundred miles. Erm, no, that's a wild take. It would be better off to argue than no one would notice Sansa slipping out quietly rather than keep asserting that Tyrion choking on his pie would have wedding guests trampling each other in a panic but it's up to each of us what we find plausible. It's a royal wedding feast in a feudal monarchy, the guests are the great and the good, many of them experienced in combat and messy deaths. There needs to be a big enough shock and a good enough reason for everyone to scarper. Tyrion? Tyrion is small beer (sorry, but this is an ableist society), he's the dwarf expected to ride the pig and get laughed at, not the second most revered man in the 7K as you imply. The King, on the other hand, is a whole different kettle of fish. Exactly this. Tyrion himself muses he should leave. Oberyn thanks Tyrion for being the object of suspicion, otherwise it might have been him. It's a giant round of musical chairs and no one wants to be the last one left standing and facing suspicion. With Tyrion choking, suspicion, if there is any, is on Joffrey, maybe Sansa. No one else needs to worry and no one needs to run like mad.

You're free to disagree. Would Tyrion choking cause some upset and localised disturbance? Sure. Enough for pandemonium to break out and guests to trample themselves in their rush to exit the hall? Absolutely not. Joffrey would be both amused and then annoyed that Tyrion was spoiling his wedding feast but guests would be taking their cue from the royal couple and staying put. And with Tyrin choking Sansa attempting to leave the room and then flee KL without people watching (or stopping) her or immediately searching for her is absolutely unrealistic. Only the King's death scene causes that uproar or the momentous tolling of the bells which distracts everyone from their normal routines. He's you know a person. Yes. What happened when Gregor Clegane killed Jon Arryn's squire in the Hand's Torney? Jeyne Poole ran off sobbing, every one else stayed put. He was a person too but there was no panic as people ran screaming for the exits. Feudal monarchy =/= representative democracy, people regard and react differently to the king. Perhaps you noticed the fuss and the ceremony in the UK when Queen Elizabeth passed away in 2022 and that was for a constitutional monarch who had a ceremonial function only. You are confusing a reaction to Tyrion choking to the scene of chaos when the king dies at his own wedding feast. The two are apples and oranges yet you are treating them the same. Why would people panic and run out, trampling each other, if someone choked on their food? Would you? Nope, thought not. It's regrettable even shocking but it doesn't affect you. @Alester Florent Tyrion is not a random schmuck but he is in very low standing with both Joffrey, who loathes and ridicules him at every step, and with Tywin after his threats to harm Tommen who he held as a hostage in his power struggle with Cersei. He is expected to ride a pig at Joffery's feast for the amusement of the guests and his own humiliation and has a drink poured over him by a furious king. He is very much a peripheral court character and dispensable. Nevertheless, my point, which I hope is clear, was that Sansa cannot escape unnoticed unless there is a major panic / pandemonium / stampede for the exits and this simply doesn't happen with Tyrion's death the way it does with the king's because people won't flee. The quotes I put above for the guests' reaction to Joffrey's death simply do not fit the death of Tyrion and this problem can clearly be seen in advance by any plotters.

Tyrion is small potatoes, not the people or court favourite you make him out to be. The books make this very clear. A random servant? Let's be serious. It's the King's wedding celebration in a feudal monarchy, you absolutely don't have an equivalent reaction if a servant or the king are taken ill. All men are not equal here (very much not). People around Joffrey will watch him fire his crossbow at the starving smallfolk or watch a man who denied his legitimacy be executed right in the throne room by Meryn Trant (after the battle of the Blackwater) without running for the exits. Tyrion has no friends or allies even among his own family (Bronn and Shagga don't count - the latter playing bandit in the Kingswood anyway) and he is not considered the saviour of KL, that's Tywin and the Tyrells who broke the siege. The smallfolk think things were better before he took charge, he's the twisted monkey demon mocked for collecting the dwarf's penny and absurdly grateful when Garlan pays him a compliment about the part he played in defending the city. He's also the king's detested uncle who is humiliated at every turn, doused with a chalice and ordered to ride a pig at his wedding feast. Tyrion's death is not going to cause any kind of uproar or confusion, certainly not anything remotely near enough for Sansa, his wife and a hugely valuable hostage to just float out of the Feast Room, The Red Keep and KL. Only the king's death can create enough of a stampede, a pandemonium (the author's words) to allow Sansa to be forgotten and unnoticed long enough to escape.

Someone =/= The King. She isn't sneaking out, she's hidden in the crowd. This pandemonium simply doesn't happen if the target is Tyrion. Most particularly the dying man's wife trying to get away attracts attention when everyone else is staying put. I think you proved my point about subjectivity and objectivity. Maybe I do too A Storm of Swords - Tyrion VIII He is going to die, Tyrion realized. He felt curiously calm, though pandemonium raged all about him. They were pounding Joff on the back again, but his face was only growing darker. Dogs were barking, children were wailing, men were shouting useless advice at each other. Half the wedding guests were on their feet, some shoving at each other for a better view, others rushing for the doors in their haste to get away. A Storm of Swords - Tyrion VIII Margaery Tyrell was weeping in her grandmother's arms as the old lady said, "Be brave, be brave." Most of the musicians had fled, but one last flutist in the gallery was blowing a dirge. In the rear of the throne room scuffling had broken out around the doors, and the guests were trampling on each other. Ser Addam's gold cloaks moved in to restore order. Guests were rushing headlong out into the night, some weeping, some stumbling and retching, others white with fear. It occurred to Tyrion belatedly that it might be wise to leave himself. Word

@Sandy Clegg @CamiloRP I think it's okay to not like a theory for subjective rather than objective reasons but it's quite amusing that this list of theories turned into a rather in depth debate about the merits of one or two. It's fiendishly difficult to disprove something, particularly when the evidence is a pov narrated work of creative fantasy and some people require forensic, water tight rebuttals of their takes on things and if that's not forthcoming they'll insist GRRM is going to reveal what they have been saying at some future point. So, I'll just make one observation rather than wading into this again. Sansa can and does escape in the general panic to flee the hall after Joffrey's death, quite literally swept up and unnoticed in the crowd and the confusion. If the planned victim is Tyrion, the husband she is sat beside and no stampede for the exit ensues, how does she escape unnoticed?

But why would she hand over her child to Ned and why would Ned pass the child off as his bastard rather than his brother's bastard to the detriment of his marriage and reputation? And what did he promise Lyanna? How is this better? There is no evidence for it at all.

I think this is probably back to front. The CotF worshipped the weirwoods because they formed a symbiotic-cultural relationship with them some time in their past with the Singers or other Children being enthroned in the weirwood roots to form the ancestral memory / cultural repository of the community. There is no need for sacrifices to feed the weirwoods because the enthroned Singers are in effect that sacrifice but in a symbiotic rather than predatory relationship. Other Singers might briefly pass a second life or the shadow of one in the ravens that were originally used as messenger birds by the CotF. The First Men warred with the CotF and cut down the weirwoods as they knew they were important to their enemy and the source of their power. Eventually some humans converted to worshipping the weirwoods and they seem to have adopted or perhaps adapted human sacrifice (the Ironborn offer victims to The Drowned God, the Red Priests to R'hllor, so it's quite possible the First Men practiced human sacrifice before encountering the CotF) but in a sense by mimicking what they thought the Cotf were doing, or by "honouring the Gods" the only way they knew how. But misunderstanding the practices of the CotF does not give The First Men the ability to create new (resurrected) "life" or a sacrificial victim the ability to become a warg and "live" a second life. Cultural imitation or misplaced rites of worship by early First Men, magical Starks or otherwise, did not create The Others.

I'm no expert but the GRRM described it as bigger than Bran's pony. Is Bran's pony small because he's still quite young or is it typical for whatever breed of pony it might be? We can't really know. Asking the internet, that most reliable and constant of sources, how much a pony weighs I found 1) Ponies are smaller [than horses] and can range from a Shetland pony at 180–200kg to a larger breed like the fell pony at 350–450kg (Town and Country) and 2) ponies usually weigh between 771 lbs to 992 lbs (350 kg to 450 kg) (Equishop). We can try and translate that to a wolf's physique but it's not something we'll ever be able to compare against the notional cave lion of Westeros as we don't actually know the size of either. It's fun to speculate but up in the air. Unless Nymeria meets one at some point

Yes, at least that is what Tywin tells Tyrion but what I was deriding was this line of thinking about The Red Wedding: "Cat killed Aegon Frey and they killed her for it. It was even. She then comes back and starts killing more. Her sins increase and so does her punishment.". It's like The Red Wedding never happened and Cat just killed poor Jinglebell out of the blue and is now sinning against the noble and innocent House Frey for just no fathomable reason whatsoever. Just totally wild, right, how can we make sense of this?

The sigils are evocative and have stories attached to them relating to the House, it's history and it's place in it's ancestral lands (Grapes for Redwynes, Towers for Freys or Hightowers, the leaping trout of the Tullys of Riverrun, the Giant of The Umbers, the Falcon of the Arryns, etc...). Any power hierarchy is a droll but meaningless kind of user-driven game of top trumps or more likely, a kind of e-sports team cheering exercise (our sigil is way better than yours, mwahaha, losers!). The Rose of the Tyrells and the Green hand of the Gardeners are far less imposing than more martial sigils and that has no bearing on relative power. Different regions have different traditions too: the North has a lot of animal symbols in it's heraldry - Bull Moose of Hornwoods, Direwolf of Starks, Bear of Mormonts - while the Reach has a lot of farming / growing symbols - Golden Rose of Tyrells, Grapes of Redwyne, Red / Green Apples of the Fossoways. Obviously the Reach is larger and more powerful militarily; all the sigils do is give a bit of texture and colour to the landscape and history.

Please, everyone knows Benjen is Daario . But, seriously, nice post and welcome! The only areas I would differ is that 1) I think Tyrion being romantically involved with Penny is the best thing that could happen to him (so it won't) as it would allow him a meaningful relationship instead of pursuing an obsession over a traumatised Tysha, a bitter enmity against Cersei or lusting after teen Dany (likely his next development) and 2) although I don't subscribe to it I think there is a smidgeon of a possibility that Sansa poisoned Joffrey. I think every culture would have myths and legends about a second moon if there really had been one in the timeframe of human memory. IIRC the in world evidence for the second moon is an argument between Dany's handmaids which boils down to "strawhead" slave Doreah saying the second moon hatched the dragons while the Dothraki pair Irri and Jiqhui laugh at her ignorance and say the sun and moon are husband and wife. I don't think we're meant to give either story any credence. If GRRM has added more in his published pseudo-histories and mythos then there might be something to it but if not it feels like an intelligent but unsupported hypothesis.

Lord, I'm torn on this. Part of me says it's clearly the bantam rooster of House Swyft, followed narrowly by the white lamb of House Stokeworth. But another part of me thinks the purple unicorn of House Brax might just style out the win from the pink maiden of House Piper.

She doesn't understand the long term effects on Robert (and nor do we) as they aren't explained beyond "it remains in the flesh". She clearly believes the unspecified risk to him is outweighed by the short term benefit of getting him down the mountain (and a possible second dose to get him through the feast). She clearly understands the importance of him getting down the mountain alive and not having a fit in front of his bannermen (from whom he is all but hidden at The Eyrie in the normal course of events) but at no point in any of this is she dosing him because she feels threatened and sees dosing him a way of keeping herself safe. And her safety relies on keeping him alive and LF in power as his protector, surely. Colemon can refuse and say it's too risky and then explain why. If she told him to give Robert The Tears of Lys or The Strangler he would say no. It's true that he agrees against his better judgment because he understands the medical risks and she doesn't but he does agree. She leaves after he agrees to two doses, the point he makes is there must be no further doses after that for a period of six months. And no one is there to guide his hand to administer it. If he really thinks it's too dangerous he can opt not to. In terms of short term safety for herself I suppose, yes, you could argue that she would not have got him across the ice bridge without fitting without sweetsleep so she was percipient to push Colemon for the first dose. Otherwise they would both be dead. That's the kind of circumstance that might warrant a further does of sweetsleep within six months despite Colemon's warnings. What happens in this hypothetical situation is all in the future. Beyond that I guess we'll agree to disagree.

My man, read the passages again and show me where Colemon tells Sansa that giving Robert sweetsleep is endangering his life. What he tells her is that "it remains in the flesh" and that he must not be prescribed more until six months have elapsed, after the two doses which he agrees to, sets the dosage of and administers himself. This after he has questioned Sansa on Robert's physical condition - nosebleeds - to determine whether it is safe to administer these two doses. Presumably he reviews Robert's physical condition before the feast to decide whether the second dose is safe or even necessary at all. What Sansa knows is that sweetsleep has both benefits and side effects. What a thirteen year old knows of the dangers is what Maester Colemon tells her, which is precious little, other than that they must be careful not to administer too much or too often. To say she knowingly endangers his life is wrong. To say so while ignoring her leading him over the ice bridge on the descent that same day is myopic. It's really not. He warns vaguely of side effects but not specifics and not clearly and he agrees to two doses, saying there must be no more after that for six months. If it's going to risk killing him Colemon would come right out and say it, surely? If on the other hand you subscribe to the view that Colemon knows he is killing him then by all means argue that Colemon doesn't want to implicate himself and suspects that "Alayne" is in on it too but pretending ignorance so Colemon can be framed for doing it while the instigators, LF / "Alayne"', plead ignorance and assert that he is the maester responsible for Robert's care. In other words they are dancing round each other in this scene. But from her pov what she knows of sweetsleep and how it works (hell, what we know) is very little, nothing at all really until Colemon gives a veiled and partial disclosure. Thirteen year old Sansa, given the responsibility of getting Robert down the mountain and looking his best for his bannermen, has a powerful medicine that can help with all that and some vague warnings about not prescribing too much or too often - and a maester who agrees to two doses rather than telling her he won't do that because of a lethal risk to Robert. If he ever tells her that then there's a conversation to be had. But right now it's like milk of the poppy, something to be given in certain circumstamnces but not too much or too often.

As far as I can see there is one conversation at The Eyrie about getting Robert Arryn down the mountain and through the subsequent feast/dinner without a shaking fit. You are correct that Sansa advocates for a cup of sweetmilk before the descent and a second before the dinner but this is a total of two doses. Something which Colemon agrees to it must be noted, if reluctantly, which hardly sets an alarm bell ringing that this is poisoning him. It's a medical treatment with side effects that confer risks that don't appear to outweigh the benefits to her non-medical mind. The dosage is of course left to Colemon. Does he receive the second dose and what if any is Sansa's involvement beyond the suggestion at The Eyrie that morning? Colemon says there must be no more for at least half a year after this and she says he will have to take it up with her father but that last remark invites the understanding that it would be conditional on circumstances arising where sweetmilk would be necessary or advocated for rather than administered as a routine prescription dose. If his fits get worse and he injures himself they may have to decide on treatment vs no treatment despite the greater risk of administering it. No one can predict the future and events may force a choice to be made. I really don't see this as evidence of Sansa deliberately embarking on a programme of upping the frequency and dosage of his medication despite being warned against it - as the poster I originally eye-rolled at presented it as. I see why some people project this forward to see Sansa becoming LF's protégé "Alayne" in truth or perhaps an independent yet darker version of herself but this is conjecture for the future not something to be presented in the present tense.

When does she order or administer additional doses?

When does she do this?

This thread did actually start as a Stark hate thread (there are a number of posters who regularly start or join threads bashing Arya, Jon, Sansa, Bran and Cat and you'll notice who they are in time) but morphed into a pretty good discussion of where GRRM might be heading with the Alayne persona. Sansa ONCE pushing for sweetsleep on the day they need to get Robert down the mountain (that day of all days) does not a cousin murderer make. Indeed she spends a great deal of time at The Eyrie looking after him and pitying him. I find it particularly surprising that people ignore that it's the same day that she advocates for a pinch of sweetsleep that she leads him across the narrow ice bridge at considerable risk to herself. He fits immediately afterwards. We can legitimately ask if he survives this without sweetsleep. Or whether she does. It's a one-off measure in an extremely time critical situation - they have to get down the mountain right away or they'll be trapped; almost all of the servants and guards have already gone and the weather is closing in. The reason it's a hot topic is Sansa's internal thoughts in her Alayne persona sometimes appear to be aligning with LF's worldview which opens up the possibility of her becoming LF's child rather than Cat & Ned's child. The girl who responded to Cersei's advice to make the people fear her with the thought "I will make them love me instead" seems to me no more likely to heed LF's ruthless, manipulative, cynical and murderous advice than Cersei's. But just like she played a part in Joffrey's Court in KL - "I don't have the traitor blood", "I'm a good girl" etc... - she's playing a part in The Vale as LF's daughter. Unlike in KL where she could hope for Robb's victory or the promise of "Come to the godswood if you want to go home" she has no such hope in The Vale so her options seem even more limited. It's this, I think, which leads the non-Stark-haters to believe she will be caught in LF's trap and become his pawn. I think Robert Arryn is just as likely to be the means by which the Sansa / Alayne dilemma and LF's hold over Sansa could be resolved as she decides once again to protect the innocent or helpless Robert (as with Dontos on Joffrey's birthday). But GRRM has isolated her so effectively he'll have to write in some means for her to escape this bind (Bronze Yohn Royce (who almost recognised her), Lady Waynwood, or even a missing Blackfish returning to The Vale to seek support; plus the Lannister disintegration at KL and the Bolton collapse in The North making a good time for a Stark heir to re-emerge). That of course puts her back in the position of people competing over her for her claim, the last thing she wants, but none of the characters have ever really had good choices.

Honestly no one is definitely safe but I would be surprised if Tyrion, Bran or Arya died. Likewise I think Sansa, Jon and Sam will survive. Asha and Davos are probable survivors but expendable. Arianne and Theon are possibilities as are The Hound, Meera and Jojen Reed, Hodor, Ghost and Summer. Dany, Jaime, Cersei, Euron, Victarion, Aeron, JonCon and Stannis, Doran, Tommen, Myrcella, Margery, Loras, multiple Sand Snakes, (F)Aegon, Selyse, Shireen and Jorah Mormont are all toast. Varys and LF too. Areo Hotah: would we even notice either way? That axe has more personality.

Nah, he, Rorge and Biter very nearly burn to death in that wagon. It's pure luck (for them) that Arya happens to come by heading for the tunnel and throw them the axe. They are seconds away from dying. And Jaqen is serious about repaying those three lives. He hangs around Harrenhall for ages to repay them and nearly bricks himself when Arya tells him his is the third name. I think the simplest explanation for Jaqen is as a character with a formative role in Arya's arc and development. The Black Cells, his being bound in the wagon, his mysterious purpose in KL in the first place are all pretty irrelevant. GRRM is a gardener and put in a cool character with a specific story role (re Arya) and a blank space backstory he cold fill in if and when he desired and then expanded his role with another mysterious purpose off in Oldtown - one which will be explained more clearly we imagine. Maybe he'll tie those purposes together but like Syrio or Yoren (or The Hound) he's one of Arya's protectors who are stripped away or abandon her one after the other and it's what he's up to now that matters. I can't see much reason to hire him to off Ned who never wanted the Handship, already tried to resign once and once he's agreed to take the Black his honour will hold him there. The reason Jaqen goes north is because the author wants to use him in Arya's story not to strike at a target at WF or The Wall (places he does not subsequently visit).

I am using the dictionary meaning. You are either misunderstanding the word or twisting it for some bizarre reason to suit your own purposes. You can repeat this line of argument ad nauseam (and it seems you will) but it just seems rather silly. No, it's not. The Tyrells are on the up in alliance with House Lannister. They are not afraid of utter extermination at the hands of House Lannister and instead intend to play the game smartly and surpass them in influence and power. Tywin has no intention of getting into a conflict with the Tyrells, whom he needs, let alone exterminating them. They know this very well. So does the reader. You are making a wild exaggeration and rather mind-bogglingly insisting that it's fact. That doesn't fly. He is not nailed to his seat. And if he were he would still be reachable. Particularly if someone had decided to, ooh, I don't know, slip a bit of poison in his pigeon pie, maybe? I think someone had an idea that might have happened to someone at the wedding somehow. I don't see any factual inaccuracy or misrepresentation in this statement of yours hence I had no further comment. I don't agree with your reasoning as I've already said but I don't see any reason to argue over it. This is funny. You seem unable or unwilling to focus specifically on what I am saying and are just repeating yourself. You know exactly what three statements of yours I am referring to and none of them are correct as I have pointed out to you in very clear and simple terms. The Reach is an ally, not a target of the Lannisters so it's all very interesting to hear your geo-political analysis and your inferred wisdom that everyone in The Reach is quaking in their boots at the thought of Tywin, Destroyer of Worlds, turning on them next and unleashing Armageddon but it's not at all true. It's quite funny seeing you push this so doggedly. Hmm... You rely on Joffrey saying it's the pie. Is that a verifiable fact in your view? I hope you realise he might be wrong about this. No, please don't give me a long boring response about how it could only possibly be in the pie. You've done that for years. I know you think that but the issue is other people don't. And do you mean verifiable facts like Olenna's dread of The Reach being sown with the skulls of Tyrell infants? You do realise that comment was not even addressed to you, yes? And that is was a supplementary comment in support of motivations for LF to act rather than a refutation or an argument against the motivations mentioned? In any case, whether you are too narrow-minded to see it or too adversarial to admit it, it is indeed an additional motivation for LF to want Tyrion dead. But, fill your boots, for a second time no less, acting as if this has been presented as the sole or principal motivation for LF to act, it seems you find it satisfying creating a strawman to attack. This isn't based on actual facts. This is your conclusion drawn from your interpretation of character motivations, motivations which you have inferred as founded on an unspeakable dread within House Tyrell that they face extermination at Tywin's hands. No such fear of extermination is borne out in the books and is a wild allegation based on the nascent Tyrell - Lannister competition; in fact it goes beyond that into pure invention. Expounding on the geography or population density of The Reach doesn't create the dread of such apocalyptic destruction whether you think it should or wish it did. Sorry, but there it is.

There's only so many ways I can say this. Whether she means it or not she invites Sansa to accompany her. You are arguing motivation and intent, I am simply pointing out that the meaning of what she says is that Sansa leave with her, a point you seemed determined to refute. Accompany means what it means whether you believe what she says or not. Can we end #accompanygate now? Also, it might help if you addressed the points made by the person you are replying to rather than blurring posters together. That might spare me all this talk which isn't relevant to what I said. You argued that Olenna's motivation was the fear that Tywin would exterminate House Tyrell, a picture you painted in apocalyptic terms. This isn't borne out by the text. Sorry. I'm not interested in arguing with you over your wilder inferences as you have proved you will go on for ever, merely in pointing out that they are not textually accurate. If you can't accept that, then there's nothing more to say. You said Tywin was unreachable. I said he was anything but as he was at the same feast as Joffrey. Like with #accompanygate and "The Rains of Highgarden" you are playing fast and loose with the text. I think you'll find there are three examples above which refute your first point. Which are what I am talking about specifically. As to your rhetorical questions, what do they have to do with anything I have said? Said with customary closed-mindedness. There are plenty of other ideas, stated over the years and in this thread. If you don't agree with them that's fine but you don't have any particular insight that others lack here, just your own take on things. Please realise that. I quite clearly said it was an additional motivation. Additional to the ones that others had mentioned. If you read what people actually posted instead of wondering how to use it as ammunition in an adversarial sense we could avoid a lot of this pointless clutter. This is a wild inference that you now choose to claim as fact. How silly.

Look, you can certainly argue that Olenna does not mean what she says but you cannot argue with the meaning of her words. She says she is leaving the day after tomorrow and suggests Sansa accompany her. That is crystal clear and unambiguous in meaning. She provides a cover story for this to allay the suspicions of listening ears, a pretext really, by presenting this as a visit by Sansa while the men are having their war. Whether she means this or is laying a false trail for listening ears, including Sansa's, is another matter. I am fairly certain we can agree on what the word accompany means so hopefully we can put this one to bed. Well, no. ASOIAF works on a number of levels obviously: ice vs fire, Stark vs Lannister, the grand Game of Thrones being the most obvious but this is not a story about Lannisters vs Tyrells. Mace gets to play Warwick Kingmaker in tWot5K and extracts significant rewards from the Crown: Margaery to be Queen, Mace himself on The Small Council, Loras in The Kingsguard, the huge land and power grab with the attainder of the Florents and Brightwater Keep passing to the Tyrells. They are reaching "overmighty" status and Tywin reinstates Pycelle to prevent the Citadel naming another Tyrell to the Small Council. The Tyrells are on the up and they may overreach - the ploy for WF makes little practical sense for either Lannisters or Tyrells given it's distant location and the Northern Lords' history of loyalty to the Starks but there it is - but they are most assuredly not in bits about Tywin annihilating their House. There is no textual support for this and no basis to claim they fear becoming the next version of "The Rains of Castamere". You may feel there is a plausible reason to feel the Tyrells are wary of Tywin and wish to prevent Winterfell passing to the Lannisters - and to secure it themselves (this is all fairly straightforward power politics after all) - but the fear of extermination is not at all supported by the text. Mance is trying to save his people, Olenna? Nah, she's protecting Margaery and/or advancing her House's interests. Tywin is not unreachable either. He is at the same feast his grandson was poisoned, very probably by a Tyrell, and he is later murdered in The Red Keep with a crossbow. There's even a theory that Oberyn had managed to poison him thought I don't subscribe to that. I feel like you made an argument here that relies on making wild inferences about character motivations that are not supported by the text rather than reached a conclusion based on actual facts. Sorry. Since AGOT, Tyrion has known that LF lied about him owning the catspaw's dagger, a lie that put Tyrion in mortal jeopardy with the catnapping and Lysa's version of justice at The Eyrie. Since Tyrion survived and questioned him over it LF has every reason to expect that Tyrion will eventually get round to undermining him or offing him as payback so we can infer self-preservation as an additional motive for LF.

If Tyrion is framed for regicide she'll be free of the marriage quick enough. But above all Sansa wants to escape and ending the marriage to Tyrion isn't nearly as important as her subsequent Vale chapters show. She says "Perhaps you would like to accompany me". That quite literally means to go with her. It's an odd thing to try and turn into meaning something different like traveling there on her own in a few months time. What? This is a fantastical invention that has no basis in the text. Indeed the Tyrells have the upper hand over the Lannisters and Mace could basically name his price for supporting them. But if you really believe it then you should believe that Olenna wanted to kill Tywin, the monstrous world-ending danger you claim she fears so much: there are plenty more Lannister cousins to fill Tyrion's shoes after all. Dude, everyone has ideas about this, please try and have a little more humility about your own. Tyrion doesn't have a history of repressed memories despite some very unpleasant ones so there's no apparent base to build from (like the unkiss, minor though it is). He is our POV at the wedding and although drunk we do have his thoughts on leaving before Joffrey gets any nastier so it's hard to marry that up with a pre-conceived plan to off Joffrey. And the hairnet I feel surely has a purpose other than as a writer's ploy to wrongfoot the readers and characters. The poisoning is a crime looking for a criminal and as Oberyn tells Tyrion afterwards he thought he could have been accused himself. I think we can take Tyrion's confusion, then and in later povs, at face value.