Jump to content

Bernie Mac

Members
  • Content count

    2,001
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bernie Mac

  1. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    You don't know that. There is zero suggestion that Robb does not have enough information to make a judgement call on this one. You have an agenda to push and are pushing a narrrative that is not presented in the book. No one Not the Blackfish and his scouting network Not the nobles with Roose, including the Freys who remain in contact with the Twins Not Tywin or Tyrion Think that Roose sabotaged the battle. The only reason some readers think this is because of Roose's later actions. Again, a made up point on your part. We have no idea if this is true. We do know however that the Freys are in contact with the Twins and there seems to be no suggestion that Roose deliberately butchered a good portion of their men and got Walder's sons captured. Many of the Northern and Frey noble prisoners were captured at Harrenhal, none seem to blame Roose for what happened to him. Yes. Because Roose lied about it and all the men with Glover were either captured or killed. There is no suggestion that anyone was scapegoated for the battle of the Green Fork There is no suggestion that Robb was angry with what happened at the battle of the Green Fork Roose's gambit with Glover was only possible because he knew Robb would be dead before he found out the truth. He does not have that same option at the start of the war when everything was unclear. No, you seem to be missing what is being said here. He makes zero mention of Roose. Tyrion, like Tywin, is under the impression that this was the entire Northern army led by Robb, when infact it was a successful diversion. Are you under the impression that Tyrion still thought it foolish after the battle when the news of Riverrun comes in? No. It was a success. We don't know if there was another option. Roose had to get close enough to get Tywin's attention. Roose had no cavalry. It seems unlikely that battle was not an option. If you can quote anything from the books or GRRM's numerous comments on the series to support the idea that battle was not an option I will gladly hear it. You say that? How he has no cavalry, and he needs to distract Tywin. Battle seems unavoidable. Why is Robb not angry about this? He's certainly aware of his losses and has a competent scouting network in the Riverlands. Is the Blackfish not very good at his job? Why are the men with Roose not angry about this? Why does Tywin still think of Roose as wary and cautious after the battle if this was the case? No one in the books thinks Roose fucked up. I'm sorry, but how do any of these quotes back up your point? 15 and you are miscalculating the medieval world and nobility training. Tyrion and Sam apart, every noble son of Robb's age would have been trained in the art of warfare. He is not calling Robb braindead, he is saying he is green. Which he was. Green does not mean being untrained. No, it was not. That is demonstrably false. They marched because Ned was arrested, Ned was arrested because he knew the truth about the incest and was not willing to drop it. Either you are unclear about why the North marched South or you are deliberately misrepresenting why they did so to try and win a meaningless internet argument.
  2. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    Except he kind of did. Every battle Robb leads he rushes in and mostly it works, the only time it backfires is when he is injured taking the poorly defended Crag. Robb takes the chance that Jaime is unaware of his coming, or that the army at Riverrun is unaware, he marches West without any real plan and his magical wolf finds a hidden entrance into the West. His plan to retake the North hinges on there being secret passages into the North that will allow him to take Moat Cailin. In the battles Robb leads bravery and chance take up a huge part. There is nothing wrong in this, many a young successful commander was the same. But he very much was a risk taker. I think in fairness, that quote is spot on in regards to Robb and his campaign. He was more brave than he was wise. Are you really under the impression that Robb was less brave than he was wise? Jesus Christ, Are any of you able to debate in good faith? Did I say the Greatjon is green? Does Tywin saying that about Robb mean that he thought every one of Robb's commanders was going to be green? The Greatjon was the kind of commander that Tywin was hoping Robb would use. A vainglorious commander who would risk it all for a win. The fact that Robb was going to the use the Greatjon until his mother talked him out of it precisely for these reasons shows that Tywin had a decent understanding of Robb. She didn't have much choice in letting him go, he won his trial. Lysa did not give Cat that option. She made a huge mistake with regards to Tyrion, but it was just one mistake.
  3. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    Your original point was that Roose was sabotaging the battle and you deduced that one of the key evidence was; Now we have no idea if that happened in the books. You've made that up. Rather than admit you were mistaken you've doubled down. Frankly, if your only evidence of the horn blowing is down to that being the general behaviour of armies how is that evidence that Roose sabotaged the battle? Would you have blown the horns in Roose's situation? If not, why do you assume Roose did? Again, I'm not reading the rest of your post until I know whether you are arguing in bad faith or just confused on the subject.
  4. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    Sorry, I'm not reading the rest of your post until you can prove you are not arguing in bad faith. Your original quote was Which is not based on anything from the books. Tyrion, from the quote I provided, is literally woken up by Lannister trumpets. The Lannisters scouts know where the Northmen are. Where is this claim that the Northmen started blowing their horns before the Lannisters did? Are you genuinely arguing in bad faith? Did you mistakenly believe the books showed evidence of the Northmen alerting the Westerland scouts/army to their position? Do you simply not care what is written in the books?
  5. Bernie Mac

    Why did the rebels reward Tywin Lannister ?

    You have ignored my question. Why do you constantly do that? It is the Middle Ages, killing relatives was often overlooked if it meant gaining powerful alliances to try and win the Crown. The History of the War of the Roses is full of such alliances. Thomas Stanley, the man who many believe was responsible for the Death of the Princes in the Tower, was one such Lord. What is stopping Tywin from rebelling himself or joining another faction? You ignored my question, so I will ask it again, how can Robert and Jon be secure that Tywin abandon their cause like he did Aerys? Yes. I know that. How does that answer any of my points I asked of you? Two questions How long does this last for precisely? In your opinion? Did Tywin reveal this to Jon Arryn? Is Jon Arryn psychic? Why are you repeating what I have just said? Except they have no idea how long Tywin would be on ' their boat' for. The question was why the marriage happened. I quoted why Jon Arryn suggested the marriage. Where in the books is it claimed that Jon Arryn took Tywin's alliance for granted? How is it not? Is Tywin trustworthy in your opinion? Please answer this one Well that is a lie. We know a Baratheon in the recent past had rebelled, we know some Lords in Dorne had desires of independence in multiple Vulture wars. The Ironborn also had desires of independence. And more importantly, no Baratheon had ever toppled the Targs before and became King. Just because something had not happened before does not mean it could not. You get that right? And yet there was two kings in the war of the Five Kings who were not called Baratheon or Targaryn. You know that, right? This is what happens when a Kingdom is usurped, more factions think they can do the same. I have been trying to explain this to you and for some reason you refuse to listen. Jon Arryn and Robert Baratheon was right to be worried of a fractured kingdom, the events of the series proves. How do you still not get this? You are like some flat earther who refuses to believe the earth is round unless you can see for yourself. Jon Arryn could see the political landscape. Most people reading the books and have a rudimentary understanding of history can also see this. Robert, by taking the Throne away from the Targaryens, had fundamentally changed what Westeros was and could be. Tywin had already betrayed one King. Nothing was stopping him from doing the same again. Two questions Are all the characters immortal? Are the characters incapable of change? Your whole opinion is flawed. The characters may all have that opinion in 283. No one knows what they will be thinking in 286, 295 or 300. Jon Arryn wanted to secure a long term peace, he wanted Robert to align with the most powerful House in the realm. I will repeat myself for the 5th time to you, Hightower and Tyrell would also have been acceptable, but no more so than the Lannisters. Sorry, what does this even mean? What does this even mean? You are making zero points here. Can you stop being vague and make points that have meaning rather than generic statements that no one is arguing against. Could he not? Is this the same guy who was willing to sell his own sister into slavery to get a Crown? It is more than clear that Viserys would do anything to win back the Throne. Do you take 'forever' literally? Tyrion was working with Aegon, is planning on working with Dany. Forever is a figure of speech. You get that, right? What? If the Reach and Westerlands decide to become independent, and the likes of the Ironborn and Dorne follow suit then Westeros is no more. These are the sort of possibilities that Jon Arryn was trying to avoid. Yes. Exactly. Because even though the marriage was agreed to Joffrey, he knew that he needed to keep the Tyrells on side. He was not an idiot. Jon Arryn was not an idiot. They did not take alliances for granted. Bingo! The same goes for Robert and the Lannisters. Without the Lannisters (or Tyrells, or Hightowers) the rebel King Robert has no edge over his potential enemies. No one claimed it was exactly the same. Please answer the question and stop trying to avoid it. No I am not. I have not said that or even suggested that was the only reason. Why ignore my question and invent a strawman argument? Stop deflecting every question you are asked. A little bit more is needed than that. Why are you wasting both of our time when you can't even answer simple questions? No shit. Time does not cease after that war. You do understand that, right? Jon Arryn is concerned with keeping Robert's throne. Marrying Robert to the most daughter of the most powerful Lord in the realm helps do that. Tywin and Aerys were once best friends. Times change. We have no idea if they are even an option. Do you know if they were an option? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? Some simple questions Were any such brides available from those Houses? Were they the right age for procreation in the short term? Were their Lords willing to make such an alliance with Robert at that time? Do the Hightowers or Tyrells have the same control over their bannerman that Tywin did? eh? What is the point of this? How does this help your argument or disprove mine? Again? How does Aerys and Tywin's close friendship in their youth have any bearing on our conversation? Short term, maybe, we have no idea longterm. You do understand this, right? Not really. The Reach had surrendered. They'd lost men in the war and were historically divided. No one House could guarantee the entire Reach. House Lannister guaranteed the Westerlands. Tywin guarantees an entire region. Mace, 18 years later, could not, what makes you think he was more competent during Robert's Rebellion? What makes you think Jon Arryn or Robert Baratheon had that much faith in Mace? Please answer these questions. So how does this make either Reach Lord any better than Tywin? Tywin guarantees his region. Can you not see how Jon Arryn may have favoured this? Not really. The Reach and Dorne hate each other. With the Westerlands behind the Crown he can expect that the Reach and Dorne will not unite. Is there any part in the books that suggests that Jon Arryn thought this? I did read your point. As i said in previous posts, I have no idea what you are trying to argue here. Jon Arryn thought Cersei Lannister was the best option due to Her House Her age Her appearance You are arguing that Jon Arryn was wrong. Name the alternative women? How old is she? Had her child rearing years past her? Was she someone attractive that Robert would want? Would she want Robert? Would her father? What did Leyon bring to the table that was better than Tywin? Please answer all these questions. Why would you not. When I said Westeros, what part of that statement made you think I was not talking about all of Westeros? I asked you first. Don't deflect a question. Name all the characters who knew about who ordered the death of those Royal children? You originally claimed it was common knowledge, prove it? Don't be vague. How many is huge in your opinion. How many soldiers and lords do you think was present? Where do you think this took place? Do you think all the nobility in White harbour know? Stop dodging questions. If you have no proof then just say so rather than continually deflect questions. We don't even know if they know. Tyrion thinks they might, we have no idea. All of them? Where is that said? Entirely my point. We don't hear any Lannister loyalist going crazy during the sack either, do we? Nope. You have invented that part. The city was going to be sacked no matter what. Sacks are unavoidable and they are down to attacking army. To who? What do you think is going to happen? Sorry, once again you've avoided answering a question by askin another one. I will gladly answer your question though. None to our knowledge We have no idea See, that is pretty easy. Now can you answer all the questions in this post and all the ones you avoided in my original reply. eh? How have you came to that conclusion? We have zero idea if Redwyne and Tyrell have heard the rumours or even care. What are you basing your position on? But we do hear about Elia being killed by other people. So I'm confused about your point. eh?
  6. Bernie Mac

    Why did the rebels reward Tywin Lannister ?

    You've not done a great job of it. How can Robert be secure in House Lannister's loyalty a year after he is coronated? No, we have a quote of Tywin not wanting Robert as an enemy after the war. If Robert had secured a marriage with a Hightower, Tyrell or even bride from a foreign power then Tywin is out in the cold. Rebellions happen, frequently to new kings who have usurped their power. Robert, even two decades later, is worried about the realm rebelling against him "There are still those in the Seven Kingdoms who call me Usurper. Do you forget how many houses fought for Targaryen in the war? They bide their time for now, but give them half a chance, they will murder me in my bed, and my sons with me. If the beggar king crosses with a Dothraki horde at his back, the traitors will join him." He needed to secure a powerful alliance, Tywin was a powerful alliance. But Robert could not take their alliance for granted anymore than the Targs did. Aerys thought Tywin was loyal to him, do you not see a lesson there? Apologize for that. But it is frustrating having to basically repeat myself to you every time you reply to me because you have not properly read or understood what I have said. In fairness that may well be just as much my fault as it is yours. They are not the only options. We see in the War of the Five Kings that it is never just a case of just two options. And yeah, the Targs were still an option. They'd hardly be the first Pretender to forgive a former enemy if it meant a change at regaining the Throne. Alliances are often fluid, look at Goodbrook, one of Edmure's closest friends despite Hoster murdering his father. Well I'd disagree with you here and so would history. If regaining the Throne meant making an alliance with House Lannister then Viserys would have done so in a heartbeat. He says it is more than a temporary alliance? That he can never pick another side, or even independence or some other form of opposition? Can you quote him on this one rather than imply he said something, which I'm pretty sure he did not. If Tywin and Mace form an alliance then all of a sudden Robert's crown looks very vulnerable. If they both decide they don't want to pay taxes or offer military assistance to Robert then his throne becomes a target for others. Not at all. Please provide these words, because it seems you may be misreading them. Tywin says this? I think not. Why does Tywin accept the marriage of a Tyrell to Tommen? Why does he suggest that Cersei marry Loras? Because alliances need to be maintained. Tywin, more so than any other character, knows the value in maintaining alliances. That just because the Tyrells fought Stannis on the Blackwater, does not mean that if they are not kept sweet they could not become an ally of Stannis in the future. For how long would Tywin be in the Baratheon camp? How long was he in the Targ camp when Aerys married his son to a Martell? Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge exaggeration. You do know what that means right? Civil war, a literal fractured Westeros. Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to convey here? Yeah, it does. A new King who just usurped the Throne can not afford to make enemies of the most powerful Lords in the realm. He needs to forge strong, long-lasting alliances with them. Except it was not. Aerys thought it was sure, do you not think there is a lesson to be learned there? The priority was a powerful alliance, as I hav repeated multiple times in this thread, it matters little if it was Lannister, Tyrell or Hightower. However, you are demonstrably wrong about a Reach house being the priority because one Reach House does not guarantee all the Reach. Tywin guaranteed all of the Westerlands. Have you read the War of the Five Kings? How many Reach Houses are not with Mace? How many Westerland Houses are not with Tywin? Look, I find no joy in having to be this condescending, can you please reread what I have said or the books and not ask silly questions. You are making us both look bad here. Was Hightower willing to forge an alliance with Robert? Did he have an available daughter who was of an age to procreate? Please answer these. What do you think that sentence means? It means what it says. Only a few people knew the truth. Some may have heard the rumours, or suspected. They would be the minority of the population of Westeros. You keep on saying Reach lords plural? Name all of them who knew the truth? And suspecting something, is not the same as knowing something. Again, sorry to be condescending, but you do understand this, right? What? Come on, don't be this person. Sacks happen, they are unavoidable. This is spelt out by the Targ protagonist of the series She was pleased. Meereen had been sacked savagely, as new-fallen cities always were, but Dany was determined that should end now that the city was hers. She had decreed that murderers were to be hanged, that looters were to lose a hand, and rapists their manhood. In a sack all parties are involved, this is as true in real life history as it is in GRRM's fictional universe. "And who will protect us from my guards?" The queen gave Osfryd a sideways look. "Loyal sellswords are rare as virgin whores. If the battle is lost, my guards will trip on those crimson cloaks in their haste to rip them off. They'll steal what they can and flee, along with the serving men, washerwomen, and stableboys, all out to save their own worthless hides. Do you have any notion what happens when a city is sacked, Sansa? No, you wouldn't, would you? All you know of life you learned from singers, and there's such a dearth of good sacking songs." "True knights would never harm women and children." The words rang hollow in her ears even as she said them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "And if the castle should fall?" "You'd like that, wouldn't you?" Cersei did not wait for a denial. "If I'm not betrayed by my own guards, I may be able to hold here for a time. Then I can go to the walls and offer to yield to Lord Stannis in person. That will spare us the worst. But if Maegor's Holdfast should fall before Stannis can come up, why then, most of my guests are in for a bit of rape, I'd say. And you should never rule out mutilation, torture, and murder at times like these." Soldiers from both sides, as well as the common people (especially the criminal element) take advantage of the chaos a city being taken over brings. Exactly. Why would he need that if it was already known? Is this your argument for everything? How many nobles have questioned who killed Elia? Name them all? You mean Rowan suspected it. We don't know how many other Reach Lords knew or suspected. Can you list all the Reach nobles who knew the truth and the evidence from the books to back this up. And, again, you are missing the point. It is now known. History has been changed and the only people who hang onto this are the Martells and the men who are known to be especially honourable, such as Ned and Rowan. What percentage of the population of Westeros know or even care about the truth?
  7. Bernie Mac

    On Janos Slynt

    His vows are his orders and he disobeyed them, has he not? Well it becomes pretty apparent that Slynt and Bowen, at the very least, did not think that his punishment would be death. It comes without warning and when Slynt is aware of the punishment he is contrite. But we have a fair idea of what the normal punishment would be from Jon's own thoughts "As you will." Jon nodded to Iron Emmett. "Please take Lord Janos to the Wall - " - and confine him to an ice cell, he might have said. A day or ten cramped up inside the ice would leave him shivering and feverish and begging for release, Jon did not doubt. - and tie him to his horse, he might have said. If Slynt did not wish to go to Greyguard as its commander, he could go as its cook. That is Jon's initial thoughts on what Slynt warranted it. But Jon can't ignore both the past Jon slid the oilcloth down his bastard sword, watching the play of morning light across the ripples, thinking how easily the blade would slide through skin and fat and sinew to part Slynt's ugly head from his body. All of a man's crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood between us. This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well. Or a possible future where Janos might challenge him again. Janos is not executed for disobeying an order, he is executed for killing Ned and for what he may do in the future. I can understand why Jon did it, but it does not make it the right move for the Lord Commander. Any other person and they'd be sitting in a cell. Jon ignored the Night Watch's vows that a man's crimes were wiped away. Twice. He refused it twice. Two times. It undermines your argument when you need to exaggerate the amount of times he refused. I don't think you care how many times he said no, whether it was 10, 2 or even once there is no number where you would change your mind, so I'm not sure why you are saying 'many' and 'multiple' as all it looks like is that you are trying to convince others, not familiar with the text, that it was far more times than it actually was. No, not entirely. Some had chosen Jon to be their lord commander. Others had cast their stones for Bowen Marsh, Ser Denys Mal-lister, Cotter Pyke ... and some for Janos Slynt. Hundreds of them, as I recall. Jon wondered how many of those men were in the cellar right now. For a moment the world balanced on a sword's edge. What do you think the author is trying to convey when he says the world was balanced on a sword's edge? Does it read to you that everyone was fine with Jon's decision? Again, I have a feeling you are arguing in bad faith as I think you already knew beforehand that more than just Bowen was shocked by Jon's decision. I don't think your mind will be changed whether it was just Bowen and Thorne, a dozen men or around half of the Watch members in the Hall that were shocked with Jon's decision. edit: Sorry, was not trying to be rude, but I genuinely think you are aware of both of these points. It does nothing for your overall argument, which is perfectly legitimate, in portraying them differently to the book. There clearly was. By Jon's own reckoning. How so? First of all Jon had to do more stuff that they disagreed with, and then were unable to tell him 'no' and then have Jon be in a position to be vulnerable to an assassination. Jon had proved himself unwilling to listen to Watch members disobey orders and when he went too far in his orders they killed him. Okay, we are getting into semantics as I have no idea what you may mean by a 'whole lot'. For the record do you think it had any bearing in Janos and the other conspirator's decision?
  8. Bernie Mac

    On Janos Slynt

    The Protocol of the Night's Watch. All of a man's crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood between us. It comes out of the blue when suddenly Slynt is told he will die for doing so. No one suspected it, not even Jon. How many orders did he disobey? And how many times did he disobey it? Are you kidding? Do you not see any correlation between Jon executing a watchman for disagreeing with him and the mutiny and that cost Jon his life? This is wrong, Jon thought. "Stop." "Oh, Seven save us," he heard Bowen Marsh cry out. There certainly seems to be a contingent of people who thought Jon went to far. Some had chosen Jon to be their lord commander. Others had cast their stones for Bowen Marsh, Ser Denys Mal-lister, Cotter Pyke ... and some for Janos Slynt. Hundreds of them, as I recall. Jon wondered how many of those men were in the cellar right now. For a moment the world balanced on a sword's edge. Sure. At no point have I criticized anyone's opinion in this thread on the subject. You are free to see it as you want.
  9. Bernie Mac

    Why did the rebels reward Tywin Lannister ?

    I'm sorry? What is your point here? Robert did not want Jaime punished. It does not seem that Jon Arryn wanted Jaime punished. The question asked was why Jaim was not punished, do you not think I did not answer it adequately enough? Short term he may have, Jon Arryn was thinking long term. Again, this is a direct quote from the books of why Cersie was chosen as Robert's bride. Are you disputing this? Yes. For how long? Historically alliances in this era and before was cemented with marriage alliances to give both parties a continued reason to stay loyal to each other. I don't mean to come off as rude, but how do you not get this? At one point Tywin was Aery's man and when Aerys most needed him he was not. What Robert and Tywin had after the sack was a temporary alliance. Jon Arryn wanted to solidify it. Again, this is pretty much laid out in the quote I gave. Again, you would be ignoring the words in the book given to why Arryn arranged the wedding and to actual historical context. Robert had destabilized the Kingdom, Arryn knew that this could potentially see many kingdoms arise from this and Westeros undone. He saw the best method for stabilization was marriage to House a bride from House Lannister (though I strongly suspect House Tyrell and Hightower would have been just as acceptable) to secure the throne. He may have. There are all sort of reasons why a Hightower was seen as a slightly worse choice Hightower may have been unwilling at that alliance There may have been no Hightower bride available to produce heirs for Robert There may have been no Hightower women as seen as a better catch as Cersei Hightower at the time may not have been in a position of strength Tywin is the most powerful Lord in the realm. His control of his region is more secure than the Tyrell in the Reach. It makes sense that Cersei was the top choice above a bride of Hightower or Tyrell, though I'd say both would have been just as acceptable to unity. Yes. We know that from the World Book. We also know that from Oberyn as he wants confirmation on what he suspects to be the truth. The people responsible for Elia's and her children's death was not public knowledge. I'm sorry, but you seem to do this in every thread, miscomprehended what is actually said. I very specifically said only a small number of people knew the truth. I did'nt say no one knew, yet that seems to be how you are responding.. In future, before responding to me, can you please reread what I have actually said a few times before responding. It would save us both some time. That is not what a sack is. When settlements are being sacked it is, more often than not, both armies and the local population doing the sacking. It is not just one side doing it. Not only should this be common sense, but GRRM goes over this when a sack is explained to the 12 year old Sansa. How is this news supposed to get out? Do you think Robert and Tywin went into the middle of the Dragonpit to do this? And televised it for the rest of Westeros to see?
  10. Bernie Mac

    On Janos Slynt

    I think this is pretty much the truth of the matter. No one else, not even Thorne in my opinion, would have been executed that day for doing what Slynt had done. The chapter starts off with Jon fantasizing about murdering Slynt and he gets his wish, he was simply looking for an excuse and even abandon's Watch protocol, so he can carry it out himself. From Jon's POV it is understandable, he wanted revenge against the man who killed his father and someone who is a rival to his leadership in the Watch. But morally and by the Watch's rules it is a mess. Slynt should have been made to rot in a cell, not murdered.
  11. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    No. This is constantly said in the fandom and every time someone corrects this misconception it seems to be ignored. … and woke in darkness to the blare of trumpets. Shae was shaking him by the shoulder. "M'lord," she whispered. "Wake up, m'lord. I'm frightened." Groggy, he sat up and threw back the blanket. The horns called through the night, wild and urgent, a cry that said hurry hurry hurry. He heard shouts, the clatter of spears, the whicker of horses, though nothing yet that spoke to him of fighting. "My lord father's trumpets," he said. You and others have been duped into believing that the horns were by Roose. This is what happens when a fandom becomes an echo chamber. People tend to ignore or downvote(if on Reddit) any evidence that contradicts their pet theories. For more than a decade people have been claiming that the horns were by the Northmen and in many of those discussions there would be someone pointing out that the books explicitly point out that they are wrong. How long? Tell me how long it takes and how long Roose had. I am puzzled how you can claim this given the lack of information we have on this subject. There is not one POV in Roose's camp. All of our information comes from a groggy Tyrion awoken early in the early morning. Why does Tyrion not come to the same conclusion that you have? Yes. Do I really need to explain why? Roose had the jump on both of those events, having the Brave Companions and Freys on the 'inside' to get his way. Roose does not have that opportunity here. His objective is to get to the Green Fork in time before Robb's army is spotted and Tywin is able to move and reinforce Jaime's. Robb could not be sure that; None of Jaime's scouts would spot what he was doing That Jaime would be idiotic enough to give battle himself with only a fraction of his forces That none of his army would alert the sleeping camp that they were under attack Robb's plan went 100% smoothly, but any commander with a smidgen of common sense would realize that contingency plans are needed in case something does not go to plan. Roose and the Northern foot was that contingency plan. He was needed to engage with Tywin. The author's own words suggest he did want to win. GRRM: And the best sword is the one that cuts both ways, he might tell you. Take the Battle of Green Fork. Had his night march taken Lord Tywin unawares and won the battle, he would have smashed the Lannisters and become the hero of the hour. While if it failed... well, you see what happened. The only way he could lose there would be if were captured or slain himself, and he did his best to minimize the chances of that. Roose wanted victory, but victory, given how outmatched the Northern army was, was always a longshot. Again, how do you know this given we are given so little information on the subject? Why does Robb, the Blackfish, Tywin and Tyrion, the Lords with Roose, all not come to this same conclusion? If Roose had messed up so badly why are these lords still following him? Why does Robb still have faith in him? There is nothing from the books to validate the idea that Roose deliberately lost the battle of the Green Fork or did not try to win. But Roose had two objectives, to engage and have enough men to defend the Kings Road if need be. He accomplished both of these. How so? Were the Freys not also fighting? More Freys seem to have been captured than any other faction. Their captains led them on armored warhorses, standard-bearers riding alongside with their banners. He glimpsed the bull moose of the Hornwoods, the Karstark sunburst, Lord Cerwyn's battle-axe, and the mailed fist of the Glovers … and the twin towers of Frey, blue on grey. Notice who else is not mentioned? The Bolton's nearest neighbours, the Umbers. Or the main competition in the north-east region of the North, the Manderlys. Yet somehow the far away Glovers are a House that Bolton is trying to weaken? Come on! People have jumped to so many conclusions based on one paragraph, that they seemingly have not properly analysed. Fandoms are excellent, they give us all a chance to discuss and theorize about events in the book. Unfortunately a negative of that is that sometimes they turn into echo chambers and people will ignore what is actually written and rely on theories as fact. I'm sorry, but that makes zero sense. Even if he believed that Robb's army would be defeated, how is deliberately getting beat and weakening his force a good idea for Roose? Routs happen. He himself becomes vulnerable to attack. Roose does not know That Ned will die That Joffrey and his siblings are bastards and the realm is about to have multiple kings That the war will go on indefinitely That the Ironborn will attack Winterfell Roose is in the dark about what is about to happen. He is not planning accordingly. I'm sorry, ask any military leader if that makes any sense. The weaker Roose's army is the weaker his position to negotiate with Tywin becomes. The stronger his army is, the stronger his position is. You are literally abandoning common sense to try and make a conspiracy theory work.
  12. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    Renly was going to make her his 'guest'. His lords would have done the same and given they were about to join up with the Crown it would have been yet another hostage, one that Robb would possibly have to concede to. Renly made it clear what was going to happen to Cat, she has no reason to believe that the same would not be true of the Tyrells or Stannis. Could she? It seems she was not authorized to do so, to set aside Robb's crown. She can hardly barter with Sansa's hand in marriage, given Sansa was in the control of another faction and already betrothed. That is why he was picked, because he was cautious. This is not exactly unheard of in these circumstances. Tywin does the same at the Green Fork, he puts the Mountain Clans in the Vanguard, Jaime does the same when telling the Blackfish of how he will take Riverrun, Riverland men in first, then Frey and then Westerland. Roose having his own men with him in the Rearguard would be expected. I'd be flabbergasted if this was not unknown or unexpected from Robb's camp. Roose was picked because Robb needed men to survive that battle and defend the King's Road if things go wrong. In regards to the battle of the Green Fork he did his job as well as could be expected.
  13. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    According to who in the series? Robb does not think Roose was a disaster at the Battle of the Green Fork, as he is happy to have him remain in charge and wants him to lead a third of his troops when he is retaking Moat Cailin. We don't hear any grumblings from the Blackfish, his chief of scouts and second in command, or any of the other Lords present. Neither Tywin or Tyrion think Roose messed up. Tywin is actually angry that the Northern army did not fall into his trap and escaped with more men. The nobles with Roose; Glover, Tallhart and Freys, are not blaming Roose for that defeat nor think he was disastrous. Disastrous commanders who are seen as at fault for the loss of huge number of their army don't usually have the same level of support Roose did from his host. No one, not Robb's faction, Tywin's faction of Roose's own host, has came to the conclusion that Roose was disastrous at the Battle of the Green Fork. According to who? Which character in the books makes this claim? I see this repeated as fact by so many in the fandom and I'd love to know which character gives this impression in the books? There was a very real need. Tywin needed to be occupied if Robb was to have a chance of freeing Riverrun. This is just idle speculation. Why does Robb, the Blackfish or any of the nobles in Roose's own command not realize this? What incentive does Roose have to do this? Defeat can easily turn into a rout and his own death. There is zero reason for Roose to do this. It makes no logical sense and nothing in the books actually suggests this is the case He had to. His foot had to somehow beat Robb's cavalry to the central Riverlands. That is the job he was given. Yes. The majority of medieval armies have to do this when they come into distance of their enemy. They stop and get into formation. He needs to stop, organize and know where their enemy is coming from, how they are organized and which parts of the land are vulnerable to them. He can't march and do this. Especially not in enemy territory. Quite a few notable English defeats came doing just that, marching into the unknown. Where is any of this claimed in the books. We have no idea about the majority of the territory in this battle. It baffles me how no more than two paragraphs of the geography is enough for some to tell Roose what he did wrong We don't know who fired the arrows, it was the fog of war, likely both sides. Tyrion or Tywin certainly don't make any mention of the Northern army deliberately killing each other. Given the battle is from Tyrion's POV if it is not obvious to him that Roose is sabotaging the war, how can it be to you? If the battle was not needed then why does Robb not act in the same way he acted when Edmure or Glover gave battles that were not needed? Because the Greatjon is vainglorious. He was exactly the type of commander that Tywin was hoping for. Robb Stark is a green boy, more like to be brave than wise. I'd hoped that if he saw our left collapse, he might plunge into the gap, eager for a rout. Roose was cautious, his caution meant more of the Northmen were spared. The Greatjon is perfect for leading the Van, when you want a ferocious attack True. She could hardly do that when the North had been raised and was marching to war by the time she arrived. That is not on Cat, but the timeline. She did not lose him, he was released. Though I think you are quibbling here, you can't really count Tyrion twice. True. She made two huge errors. Not several, though.
  14. Bernie Mac

    Why Was Robb Such An Awful Diplomat?

    She wanted Roose to lead a battle, which did not backfire on Robb. At no point did she tell Robb to leave the majority of his army with Roose indefinitely. That is not on Cat, quite the opposite in fact as she suggested peace after Riverrun, not a continuation of the war.
  15. Bernie Mac

    Why did the rebels reward Tywin Lannister ?

    Because Robert did not think Jaime did anything wrong. You are assuming that all the rebels thought like Ned did, we know Robert did not. "Seven hells, someone had to kill Aerys!" Robert said, reining his mount to a sudden halt beside an ancient barrow. "If Jaime hadn't done it, it would have been left for you or me." Robert was grateful, not annoyed, with what Jaime had done. This was not a reward. It was a pragmatic decision to secure peace and Robert's throne. And Cersei … I have Jon Arryn to thank for her. I had no wish to marry after Lyanna was taken from me, but Jon said the realm needed an heir. Cersei Lannister would be a good match, he told me, she would bind Lord Tywin to me should Viserys Targaryen ever try to win back his father's throne," Aerys and Rhaegar being dead does not grant peace to the realm, Robert needed support and support from the most powerful Lord in Westeros was an intelligent move. A wife from House Tyrell or Hightower probably would have sufficed as well, but Robert needed more support than just the rebels he had if Westeros was to remain united. On top of being a Lannister, her age and beauty made her an obvious choice for the King. It is only with the benefit of hindsight do we know they were awful for each other. It was war. There was no official 'crime' committed. And with 12,000 Lannister men at the capital and his army untapped in the Westerlands it would be foolish to start a war over something that was possibly going to happen anyway. He was a usurper, his throne would be tainted no matter what. However, with regard to who was responsible for the deaths of Elia and her children, this was kept a secret from the public. Only a small number of people knew the truth.
  16. The Freys, after learning that Stannis on the Blackwater had been defeated and Tywin had gained the armies of the Reach and most of the Stormlands, knew the war was over. They were going to give Robb the opportunity to sue for peace and stand by his side in doing so, but if he was to ignore common sense they would not have fought on for him. The war, at least the war in the South, was pretty much over. Robb, from their vantage point, simply could not win. Keep in mind that Robb's own mother was telling him to sue for peace. Him refusing to do so in his position is stupidity or selfishness of the highest order. The Freys would have soon jumped ship, I'd bet they would not be the only Riverland House to do so.
  17. Yes, refuse the Crown. He was the military leader who was already ordering his Lords what to do even before he proved himself at the battle of the Camps and Battle of Riverrun. If he was able to tell the Northern Lords what to do in the North, when he was untested, the idea that at Riverrun, with only a handful of Northern lords present, would have to give into their demands is ridiculous. Robb was not born into a King, he chose to be one. That is on him, no one else. Frenin is coming up with misguided reasons why a character he likes messed up. By his logic we can't blame Tywin or Aerys for anything they've done wrong either because 'maybe their Lords forced them to do what they did'. He/She does not present a consistent argument. Frankly if it is idiotic to think he was threatened into taking the Crown. Cat makes no mention of this in her next chapter. If her son was threatened by his own Lords into doing something she'd have some concern about his safety with them. Robb being threatened by his Lords makes zero sense considering once he becomes King he pretty much ignores all their advice. None of his Lords wanted him to go West, that was Robb, the larger Riverland army wanted him to fight Tywin. He happily ignores them. Robb is not concerned about his Northern lords when he sentences Karstark to death, infact when he decides to do so it is only the Blackfish, Edmure and his mother he listens to. If he was some puppet king made to take the Crown his Lords would have far greater say in his decisions. Some, sadly, wants it both ways, they wants to take away agency from Robb when he makes bad decisions, but do not do the same when Robb makes good decisions. If they were at all consistent in his arguments they'd be crediting the Northern lords, not Robb, for his victories at the Camps, Oxcorss and Riverrun.
  18. Bernie Mac

    Westerlands Loot

    Capturing the mines does harm to Tywin and the Westerland Lords as it shuts down production, but the gold is not left lying around, it has to be mined and unless the Northern and Frey men actually mined for Gold it is unlikely they took much gold. They will have taken far more value in livestock than gold from the Westerlands
  19. Bernie Mac

    Why did Robb keep Edmure in the dark about his plan?

    The army outside can do that, I'm not so sure the garrison inside can. "Can we starve the castle out?" Ser Daven shook his head. "The Blackfish expelled all the useless mouths from Riverrun and picked this country clean. He has enough stores to keep man and horse alive for two full years." "And how well are we provisioned?" "So long as there are fish in the rivers, we won't starve, though I don't know how we're going to feed the horses. The Freys are hauling food and fodder down from the Twins, but Ser Ryman claims he does not have enough to share, so we must forage for ourselves. The Blackfish, who knew what was coming, had he sense to prepare. Other former Tully commanders, such as Edmure, did not have such foresight.
  20. It is not what they were doing there. Jumping ship would be jumping ship, not wanting Robb to see sense. They would jump ship much later if Robb refused to listen to reason, but they still wanted to give him the opportunity to do so. They only jump ship at that point because of his marriage to Jeyne. And yeah, most lords would back down from a war they can't win eventually, the Freys are no different to the majority of other Lords in that respect. GRRM is writing historical fantasy fiction, they are not NPC's in a computer game.
  21. Where is it claimed in the book that Robb had no option to say 'no'? You claimed he had no choice, this is not true at all.
  22. Bernie Mac

    Why did Robb keep Edmure in the dark about his plan?

    Where do you get this from? "Wounded and taken prisoner," Ser Brynden said. "Lord Blackwood and the other survivors are under siege inside Riverrun, surrounded by Jaime's host." Robb looked fretful. "We must get across this accursed river if we're to have any hope of relieving them in time." It can be taken by force. The Blackfish is more than aware of this. It is why they are in a rush to get to Riverrun in AGOT. Difficult, sure, but by no means impossible. In the past the Tully's have usually backed down or abandoned it rather than see their castle taken by force, but there is no suggestion that it can not be taken. How so? Is there an unlimited amount of food inside the castle? No it was not. The plan was for Stafford and Tywin to meet at Riverrun, trapping Robb in Riverrun. All the while, their cousin Ser Stafford would be training and arming the new host he'd raised at Casterly Rock. Once he was ready, he and Lord Tywin could smash the Tullys and Starks between them. Robb gets proactive, rather than be trapped between two hosts. Outside of it being the Riverlands capital Riverrun itself is not a particularly renowned castle. You are making it sound like Storm's End or Casterly Rock when it is nowhere close to that. No, he wanted to do both. Both Tyrion and GRRM make this clear. He is not giving up Kings Landing when he marches home, he is under the impression that he can defeat Robb and still return before Stannis is ready. "Both of them." Storm's End was strong, it should have been able to hold out for half a year or more . . . time enough for his father to finish with Robb Stark. "How did this happen?" He is not under the impression that he can not do both.
  23. eh? They want Robb to see sense, but they are still serving him, calling him King. Would they have stood down if Robb refused to be pragmatic, certainly, but they were giving him the chance decide. Once they found out about Jeyne they no longer give Robb that option.
  24. No, they were not. They jump ship the chapter they found out about it.
  25. Who do you think put the sword to Robb and made him be King? I'm happy to go over this with you, please quote from the books where Robb was intimidated and made to be King. Sorry, please repeat as I'm not sure what you are saying here. What ultimatum? Everyone present? Most of the Northern Lords were not present. Where in the books is it suggested that poor Robb was forced to become King?
×