What was Robb going to do to force the Crown to grant the North independence?

[Benxz88]

Considering (even ignoring the RW) Bolton has already turned on Robb, Lady Dustin withheld support, Karstark has turned, etc., why do you think the "proud, stubborn and loyal" northern lords have that much interest in a prolonged war against the South, especially since the river lords would have been crushed in the meantime?

Because in the winter, these Lords wouldn't have a huge part in a prolonged war. With the Lannister/Tyrell fleet occupied or severely weakened by the Ironborn, what remains of Stannis's fleet, storms, ect. the fighting would be focused on Moat Cailin (assuming there is any fighting at all during the winter). It has been repeatedly said that a small group can hold out against huge armies there. Most of that small group would be Reeds, and Howland Reed isn't one to go to the Lannisters. The rest of the Lords would only need to send a few men to help, the rest could return to their castles and holdfasts. The war would be fought, but in the Neck, and the northern lords aren't facing a prolonged battle close to them. Once back home, they can focus on preparing for winter and not on betraying Robb. They aren't going to betray him over a few men being sent to the Neck to supplement the Reeds. In this situation, Robb should last the winter and be alive and kicking for the spring.

[Castel]

I disagree. US is a nation state and the idea that holds it together is the concept of nation.

This concept has not yet been fully developed in Westeros, similar to the medieval germany.

These were what legitimized the idea of 7 kingdoms in my opinion in order of importance:

Dragons>Targaryan Blood>KL+iron Throne

Dragons are gone. The blood relation to Targaryan (reason for Robert becoming king) is almost now irrelevant. The only things that can keep the 7 kingdoms is the idea that the legitimate king which is tied to mainly KL plus Iron Throne and loosely to blood.

Even right now you can see that nothing is keeping remains of the 7 kingdoms together anymore, everyone is either planning to take it or simply doesn't care about it anymore. Without KL do you think Tyrell's accept a king in the Rock or Lannister's a king in Highgarden?

Honestly at this point the only thing holding together the Iron Throne is ambition, The Reach, Westerlands, North,Riverlands, Dorne and Vale all either need the Lannister throne or covet it. Baelish and Bolton need Lannister strength, the power of the Tyrells comes from the Lannister claim, something they know to be false, and Dorne is basically planning to take over the Iron Throne. The only reason all these people want to have a united realm is either to rule it all or to use royal resources to maintain their tenuous rule. Why go back to being kings and fight for one kingdom when you can have them all?

[Lord Paramount of Essos]

He sacrified his Kingship for his people, quite a noble act.

He didnt sacrifice a title, he sacrificed the independence of his people. The North is a diffrent country from the rest of Westeros. Diffrent people, culture, religion

When a conqueror demands the surrender of your people and you are king the noble thing is to fight for your country, independence etc. When Musolini told Greece to surrender in 1940 the answer was NO. The people holded the mountain passages (moat cailin) and even managed to beat the larger, more advanced foe, until the Germans came.

Of course i believe that Trorhen could not defeat the North, or beat Aegon. He surrendered to the foe cause he had dragons. But lets not confuse what is noble when someone wants to conquer your country

[isiman]

With the Ironborn as allies, victory would have been probably be default as the Lannisters didn't have allies and already risked defeat by Robb alone.With no allies, Robb's only chance was a decisive victory in battle vs Tywin.If Renly lived a little longer I guess we would have seen this decisive battle, no idea how it would end though.

[Castel]

He didnt sacrifice a title, he sacrificed the independence of his people. The North is a diffrent country from the rest of Westeros. Diffrent people, culture, religion

When a conqueror demands the surrender of your people and you are king the noble thing is to fight for your country, independence etc. When Musolini told Greece to surrender in 1940 the answer was NO. The people holded the mountain passages (moat cailin) and even managed to beat the larger, more advanced foe, until the Germans came.

Of course i believe that Trorhen could not defeat the North, or beat Aegon. He surrendered to the foe cause he had dragons. But lets not confuse what is noble when someone wants to conquer your country

As far as the people of the North are concerned they've kept their leadership. Aegon had proven that he was willing to keep the system as it was so there were very few changes, besides a slight blow to national pride little changed. And it is indeed Torrhen's decision to make, if the people want to fight and die well fuck them, he's the one in charge of finding the rational path for those not totally insane.

Moat Cailin is not a defense. Aegon would have laid it bare in a day and then taken the North. The only difference would be the amount of bloodshed and the number of Starks left over after Aegon was done.

I do in fact think that it's noble to sacrifice one's kingship to prevent greater bloodshed, regardless of what the person on the other side is doing.

[Lord Paramount of Essos]

there is a difference between kingship and nation independence

but i admit that you are right overall :uhoh:

[Ser Hippie]

Because in the winter, these Lords wouldn't have a huge part in a prolonged war. With the Lannister/Tyrell fleet occupied or severely weakened by the Ironborn, what remains of Stannis's fleet, storms, ect. the fighting would be focused on Moat Cailin (assuming there is any fighting at all during the winter). It has been repeatedly said that a small group can hold out against huge armies there. Most of that small group would be Reeds, and Howland Reed isn't one to go to the Lannisters. The rest of the Lords would only need to send a few men to help, the rest could return to their castles and holdfasts. The war would be fought, but in the Neck, and the northern lords aren't facing a prolonged battle close to them. Once back home, they can focus on preparing for winter and not on betraying Robb. They aren't going to betray him over a few men being sent to the Neck to supplement the Reeds. In this situation, Robb should last the winter and be alive and kicking for the spring.

But, again, this doesn't answer the question posed in the topic. Robb doesn't know the Ironborn are going to radically change their strategy, he's marching north with the assumption that he'll need an extended campaign in the North to clear out the Greyjoy forces. What's his plan beyond that?

At that point, the Karstark forces are already lost to him, Bolton's already turned his cloak. The Freys are obviously lost to him (and since no RW requires an alternate timeline, maybe are even convinced to take up arms against him). As readers, we know that Lady Dustin may also be unreliable.

Again, Robb's basically hoping that the Riverlands aren't completely crushed while he clears the North and...then what? Hold on in the North hoping something breaks his way? Why is it so honorable to sacrifice Riverrun and its bannermen for the sake of northern pride?

[WolveseatDragons]

Robb was a fantastic battle commander but an absolute idiot in terms of the larger game of strategy. When reading ACOK I never understood why he didn't go after Casterly Rock, especially after Oxcross when there was basically no army left in the Westerlands. He could have put his full force into a seige of The Rock and taken it or at least had a real chance at it. Take the Rock and he wins. Not only would it have disgraced Tywin to lose it he would also be able to pillage all of the gold stored there and sent it up North. At that point he would have held The Rock and Jaime and Tywin would have been screwed. He could leave 500 men to hold it and then headed back to Riverrun. Another HUGE mistake was he did very little to try to elicit the support of The Reach, Dorne, or The Vale. Obviously The Vale never would have gone along as it turned out but maybe the winds could have shifted had LF not had free reign with Lysa. Dorne was also something that may have been attainable if they united to go after Highgarden with the Tyrell army in KL, the Martell's hated the Lannisters as much as anyone as well. Of course had he taken Casterly Rock he would also have enough gold to hire every sellsword company in Essos had he wanted and bought food and supplies for a dozen Winters.

As for the original question though of pre RW what could he have done his options were limited. He had already left the Westerlands so there was no time to go back to take Casterly Rock. He had failed to gain an alliance with Dorne (much less the Tyrells or Vale). His only real option was to go defensive and drive out the Ironborn (easy enough) and protect the North. Even with 10k men he could easily do so. Put 500 at Moat Cailin, 3k at Winterfell, 3k at White Harbour, and then spread the rest out at Deepwood Motte, Torrhen's Square, and the other Northern castles. A well manned Moat Cailin and White Harbour were essentially invincible, especially with the Manderly Fleet playing defense. The reserve at Winterfell could be sent to take care of any flareups. He should have sent his new bride North instead of leaving her at Riverrun. He should have never agreed to go to the Twins so undefended. Instead he should have told Edmure to work out his own peace with the Freys and that he would come back to help when he had retaken The North and possibly leaving him some troops. He lost sight of his priority which was his source of strength comes from Winterfell and without firm control of the North he was too vulnerable. Hard choices but he needed to make them just as he did when he sent 2k men to almost certain death against Tywin.

I also think the Ironborn were really no more than a nuisance once Robb was back in the North. They can really only effectively attack port cities and it never made any sense to me why they would attack the North. Asha said it well at the Kingsmoot, there was nothing of value in the North to capture except a large number of ferocious warriors with a long memory. The Westerlands and The Reach always made more sense as a target for the Ironborn. In many ways The North is like Russia, far too vast and cold and filled with a population of hard men to ever conquer or certainly to continue to hold.

[Castel]

Robb was a fantastic battle commander but an absolute idiot in terms of the larger game of strategy. When reading ACOK I never understood why he didn't go after Casterly Rock, especially after Oxcross when there was basically no army left in the Westerlands. He could have put his full force into a seige of The Rock and taken it or at least had a real chance at it. Take the Rock and he wins. Not only would it have disgraced Tywin to lose it he would also be able to pillage all of the gold stored there and sent it up North. At that point he would have held The Rock and Jaime and Tywin would have been screwed. He could leave 500 men to hold it and then headed back to Riverrun

You're assuming that Tywin didn't do exactly this. Robb has no idea what sort of garrison there is, it could easily have been bumped up when Tywin realised he was in for the long haul. Getting there and being forced to run before Tywin found him beneath the walls would just be pointlessly demoralizing.

His only real option was to go defensive and drive out the Ironborn (easy enough) and protect the North. Even with 10k men he could easily do so. Put 500 at Moat Cailin, 3k at Winterfell, 3k at White Harbour, and then spread the rest out at Deepwood Motte, Torrhen's Square, and the other Northern castles. A well manned Moat Cailin and White Harbour were essentially invincible, especially with the Manderly Fleet playing defense.

See that sword? It cuts both ways. The remnants of the Ironborn were able to push back three times their number. Imagine a fully equipped force. They would have bled Robb for entry into the North. And that's assuming that the crannogmen can find a path for him and his unwieldy host. If the Ironborn dug in, it'd be a long campaign.

The Westerlands and The Reach always made more sense as a target for the Ironborn.

In the short term sure. But both the Reach and the Westerlands could defend themselves more than adequately. And the name Tywin Lannister still carries some weight. The North was the much better target, especially if you're betting against Robb. Balon lost because he died before Robb did and Aeron pulled back the Ironborn. If they had dug in after the Red Wedding, there would have been trouble.

[WolveseatDragons]

Robb was in a risky position either way. My point on Casterly Rock is he could have hit it with his full host (or at least 10k plus) early on instead of wandering off toward the Crag. Once he defeated the Lannisters second host so soundly at Oxcross a siege of Casterly Rock would have had a reach chance. He should have taken Jaime with him and did effectively an "Edmure treatment" with the castellan of Casterly Rock (who likely was no Blackfish) forced to choose between seeing Jaime hang or surrendering the castle. If Robb has Casterly Rock and Jaime he wins, period. That would give him control of the Westerlands and unlimited gold along with leaving Tywin humiliated, he would have to sue for peace at whatever terms Robb gave him. If Tywin resisted Robb would have been in a much better position to gain more allies as well at that point. Would the Tyrells have joined Tywin with Casterly Rock under seige? Doubtful. Would Dorne have allied with Robb if they did? How about The Vale? Quite possibly or even likely. I don't think you can underestimate how damaging it would have been to Tywin had Robb sacked Lannisport either which was ripe for the taking. He also could have had the Golden Tooth surrounded on both sides with no significant host left to protect it. Robb simply didn't play hardball when he had the advantage and he lost the war because of it. Of course he was also a fool to send Theon back to the Iron Islands without a promise of an alliance as well.

Another option of course would have been to offer an alliance to Stannis similar to the one in the show (still King of the North but pledge loyalty to Stannis) and put Tywin between Stannis' army and his own. The Tyrells certainly would have thought twice about joining with Tywin if he was under attack by both sides, especially if Stannis and Robb had the sense to try to get the Dornish involved (which they never did).

As for the Ironborn they could never have held Moat Caitlin because an attack from the backside would easily retake it. Robb could have organized that either through the Crannogmen or some of his loyal forces still in the North. That of course ignores that Balon did die and Caitlin was left with a skeleton crew without Victarion. Moat Caitlin was similar to Castle Black, all the defenses essentially go one way so if you can get around it the castle is easily taken.

As for White Harbor it is still a walled city on the water with a significant fleet. If it is well manned it is extremely difficult to capture, especially if the North can continually resupply from the rear.

The key was for Robb to just get him and his wife North of the Neck and he would have been safe. The Crannogmen were at full strength and the Mountain Clans of the North were untapped at that point as well. Of course under my scenario he would have let Edmure go to the RW alone or with only a small Northern continent so he would have have most of his host still with him making their way through the Neck with the help of the Crannogmen or simply waiting for them to retake Moat Cailin and have an easy crossing. If he is North of the Neck with 10k men no Southern army has a chance without dragons.

[Winterfell is Burning]

In the short term sure. But both the Reach and the Westerlands could defend themselves more than adequately. And the name Tywin Lannister still carries some weight. The North was the much better target, especially if you're betting against Robb. Balon lost because he died before Robb did and Aeron pulled back the Ironborn. If they had dug in after the Red Wedding, there would have been trouble.

No, they can't. Robb cut Tywin's access to his own lands- if he Balon decided to attack, the only army to defend them would be Stafford's (and, yes, through Theon, Balon knew or could know all this). And the Lannisters at that point have no allies. Raid Lannisport, burn/defeat the fleet again and take Fair Isle and they would essentially control the coast of the Westerlands.

Could the Westerlands defeat them eventually? Probably, but they would have it much harder than the North, and Balon would have a lot more gold in his pocket.

And in anyway, if Balon wanted independence, attacking the North was the only move that makes sure he'll never get it.

[Gurkhal]

Ironborn raids are always a threat, so they can't take all the Redwyne fleet that far North- specially considering doing so leaves the area unprotected. Plus, Manderly was building his own fleet, and they would never see it coming.

The fleet they can take north will be more than enough to outnumber Manderly's several times over, or do you think that the lord of White Harbor can measure himself against the combined naval power of the South? In regards to the Ironborn I doubt that you'll need a significent fleet just to keep them on their feet. Maybe when they have a crazed leader like Euron both otherwise the Ironborn would probably be content to raid the North without risk to themselves rather than draw the wrath of the South upon them.

Who is "we"? The fact that you're identifying that much with the Lannisters seems to indicate a lack of objectivity there, if I may say.

"We" are everyone south of the Neck who acknowledge the Iron Throne. No person can be objective as its entirely impossible to replace one's bias but I do make an attempt to be objective. And my "objective" respons is that the North could never hope to take on a united South.

Not possible, for some of the reasons already stated in this thread- having to take Dragonstone and Storm's End before, too far away, navy wasn't as developed in medieval times and used mostly for transport troops, take too much of the fleet leaves them at risk of Ironborn attacks, and so on.

Why would they need to re-take Dragonstone and Storm's End? I'm not talking about House Lannister alone going on the North but that a united South would smashed the North faster than separatists can be produced.

And...Dorne is much smaller and has a much smaller population. Aegon tried a similar approach you suggest above with dragons and failed. You also seem to ignore the North during summer is already too cold for Southern troops.

Dorne is much harder than the North. The entire kingdom is a fortress as opposed to just Moat Cailin. Also the Northern summer is no problem for Southron troopas as shown by both the Ironborn and Stannis. Its the Northern winter that's a problem.

I disagree. US is a nation state and the idea that holds it together is the concept of nation.

This concept has not yet been fully developed in Westeros, similar to the medieval germany.

These were what legitimized the idea of 7 kingdoms in my opinion in order of importance:

Dragons>Targaryan Blood>KL+iron Throne

Dragons are gone. The blood relation to Targaryan (reason for Robert becoming king) is almost now irrelevant. The only things that can keep the 7 kingdoms is the idea that the legitimate king which is tied to mainly KL plus Iron Throne and loosely to blood.

Even right now you can see that nothing is keeping remains of the 7 kingdoms together anymore, everyone is either planning to take it or simply doesn't care about it anymore. Without KL do you think Tyrell's accept a king in the Rock or Lannister's a king in Highgarden?

I really see no signs whatsoever that anyone except some reactionaries in the North and press-ganged Riverlords wants to have or be any king but the king on the Iron Throne. The problem that is missing is that there isn't, at present, a solid enough dynasty with enough power behind it to crush all opposition which makes it a free-for-all for everyone who wants to be king on the Iron Throne.

Without King's Landing, and I presume you'd use nuclear weapons or something to destroy it without chance of being rebuilt I have no idea but supposedly some other town in the Crownlands could be made the new capital. Otherwise King's Landing will be rebuilt and the king will continue to reign from there. There's more to killing an idea than destroying the symbols of it.

[WolveseatDragons]

I never understood Balon's reasoning for attacking the North other than vengeance. If there is one place the Iron Islands could never control it was the North. The North has few ports and the only real sea power is on the other side of Westeros. In order to control it you must cover large expanses of land territory with a significant host which is what the Iron Islands lacked more than anything. They have no skill at land battle and I personally question how strong of a true sea power they are. The only time they actually met a prepared navy they were crushed. They are a raiding people that essentially live like pirates. They never take on a target that is prepared, they instead attack lightly defended areas where they can sack everything and leave. How Balon ever thought he could have the resources to maintain control over the North is just mind numbing to me and if he truly did then why he didn't reinforce Theon is also a puzzle.

[Scipio Africanus]

Dorne is much harder than the North. The entire kingdom is a fortress as opposed to just Moat Cailin. Also the Northern summer is no problem for Southron troopas as shown by both the Ironborn and Stannis. Its the Northern winter that's a problem.

You're making the same mistake as the Ironman. Dorne is difficult to conquest not because of a bunch of fortresses (Storm's End, Riverrun, Winterfell and Harrenhal have changed hands multiple times in the series so far). As Patton would say, fortresses are monuments to man's stupidity. Bypassing them is more efficiant but that point was lost to most men up until far into the 20th century.

Dorne sucks to conquer because it offers little supply opportunities for large armies, especially those not used to fight in the heat (think Crusades armies in the Levant).

The point isn't one crappy fortress which can't be that formidable anyway. The point is that the neck is a swamp filled with hostile people who are difficult to locate yet are perfectly capable of finding their enemies. And not being able to raid for supplies. Which means you need a long, vulnerable supply train, which is in turn opens up ripe opportunities for the Cannogmen to raid.

Robb was in a risky position either way. My point on Casterly Rock is he could have hit it with his full host (or at least 10k plus) early on instead of wandering off toward the Crag

Didn't the books say there actually was a seizable force between Casterly Rock and the Riverlands, but that Robb chose to bypass that army? Which is exactly what I would've done. And I wouldn't want to march to Casterly Rock, a strong fortress in a hostile land with unknown forces concentrated there with doubtfull means of holding your supply line?

A lot of posters here forget that maintaining your supply line was THE most important thing of warfare before the advent of airplanes and motorized vehicles (which made armies much more mobile).

Up untill early modern times once your supply line was compromised it was basically game over. Only during the second half of the 19th century did the concept of total war develop where armies actively raided civilian populations and destroyed their industrial capacity, and were willing to cut their own supply lines and living off of the land (the American Civil war is a prime example of this).

Unless Robb went all chevauchée on the Lannister he couldn't afford to penetrate too deep into Lannister territory. He didn't have the manpower or the secure supply line to do so. Besides unlike the English situation during the 100-year war, the Riverlands were not relatively safe from invasion. All it would take is another Tyrell army smashing through the Riverlands and Robb would be stuck somewhere outside Casterly Rock hodling his ****.

No I really don't see any advantage of going to Casterly Rock in Robb's situation, just like Glover marching to Duskendale was pointless.

[Istakhr]

I never understood Balon's reasoning for attacking the North other than vengeance. If there is one place the Iron Islands could never control it was the North. The North has few ports and the only real sea power is on the other side of Westeros. In order to control it you must cover large expanses of land territory with a significant host which is what the Iron Islands lacked more than anything. They have no skill at land battle and I personally question how strong of a true sea power they are. The only time they actually met a prepared navy they were crushed. They are a raiding people that essentially live like pirates. They never take on a target that is prepared, they instead attack lightly defended areas where they can sack everything and leave. How Balon ever thought he could have the resources to maintain control over the North is just mind numbing to me and if he truly did then why he didn't reinforce Theon is also a puzzle.

Balon was almost certainly nuts. But his strategy actually did minimize the risks for Iron Islanders. Unlike North, as long as Iron Islanders manage to control themselves and refrain from attacking any southern coast, there is little reason for southerners to try to invade them. They are not large, and under ordinary circumstances they are simply too weak to be considered political threat.

While even trying to invade all of north is crazy, Iron Islanders are in a good position to take coastal lands and colonize them.

In short term they can at least pillage parts of the north, without any risk of Robb retaliating by invading Iron Islands. North does not have a navy to invade them, when attacking south alway carry the risk of Iron Islands being invaded back at a later time.

It is in the best interests of a southern king to give Iron Islanders parts of the north in exchange for them submitting to the Iron Throne. Of course Balon is probably too crazy to accept such arrangement.

Alson Iron Islands colonizing some northern coastlands can be considered advantageous for any southern king. If this happens, not only north will become weaker, but also Iron Islanders have to slowly change and become less troublesome and more similar to other people of westeros as Vikings in our own history did.

Even Balon was not crazy enough to reinforce Theon and try to keep the capital of north in the middle of hostile territory.

[Castel]

I never understood Balon's reasoning for attacking the North other than vengeance. If there is one place the Iron Islands could never control it was the North. The North has few ports and the only real sea power is on the other side of Westeros. In order to control it you must cover large expanses of land territory with a significant host which is what the Iron Islands lacked more than anything. They have no skill at land battle and I personally question how strong of a true sea power they are. The only time they actually met a prepared navy they were crushed. They are a raiding people that essentially live like pirates. They never take on a target that is prepared, they instead attack lightly defended areas where they can sack everything and leave. How Balon ever thought he could have the resources to maintain control over the North is just mind numbing to me and if he truly did then why he didn't reinforce Theon is also a puzzle.

Who said anything about conquering the entire North? They took the castles that counted and raided everything else. Most of the hardened warriors are gone, and depending on the exact layout of the castles their ships might be able to provide supplies. Balon was betting on Robb not being able to come back north or Tywin smashing him, then he gets to keep the major castles and dig in. Otherwise he raids to his hearts content. I mean, look at Moat Cailin, the Ironborn repelled three times their number...from the north mind you. Imagine if they fully stocked the castle, it'd be a fucking horror.

They'd never have a better opportunity than this, Winterfell is nearly empty and it can't stretch itself to defend everything. Why the fuck Theon didn't burn everything and put everyone to the sword and carry the kids back to Pyke is beyond me, Balon might have actually shown him some affection for winning the war.

But yeah, it's in the best interests of the Iron Throne to create a situation where half the north hates the other half.