Addressing Stark bias: Part 3

[kimim]

No. Reading 10 chapters of a work of 5 books won't do it. As I already responded, it's straight forward to see that the early parts, if not all of AGOT is designed to make the reader root for the Starks. However, it should be equally plain to see that GRRM in his subsequent books raise questions about this assumption, to the point of undermining it entirely.

The exact same thing happens to Dany, and you end up with the exact same sort of Dany-fans, who can see no wrong in anything she does.

Definitely, and I don't think GRRM waits till the later books to undermine the assumption.

See Prologue to GoT: We meet Gared. We respect Gared. THEN we meet the Starks, and a page in, Ned is beheading Gared. Ned has a lot of noble things to say about doing his own killing, listening to a man's last words, but did he really listen to Gared? That beheading alone should force us to look at Starks more objectively.

And then there's Ned's most unfortunate stint as Hand. In FoC Cersei says that Ned forced her to kill Robert sooner than she would have: "Eddard Stark took up right where Arryn had left off; his meddling had forced her to rid herself of Robert sooner than she would have liked, before she could deal with his pestilential brothers." You don't have to wait till FoC to figure this out: Ned goes about his investigation with zero subtlety and it isn't like he doesn't know that there are spies everywhere. He warns Cersei, which is insanely unwise. He sends away his men, leaving himself (and his family) unprotected, which is suicidal. Then he loses his head. Then there's a civil war. Sure, the beheading is Joffrey's fault, but Ned has hardly comported himself wisely here.

Stark bias is fine. Stark bias that refuses to acknowledge Starks have rather major faults is not fine.

Also: Starks are my favorite house.

[Knight of the Teabags]

I don't get why people think the North having independence is such a bad idea. I'm not going to say that I think it's a bad idea because honestly don't know.

But why exactly is the North having any independence so bad? They survived without the south for thousands of years. When have the iron throne been a good thing for the North? Even when the Ned was Robert's friend for years and Robert was King what exactly did the north get from the iron throne, they were left to their own devices like how the Targs left them alone.

And to the bolded the north have been throwing armies back from their region for thousands of years, the Ironmen couldn't pull off what they did if the whole Northern army was in the north. What exactly would the North need from the Iron Throne if they had independence and the Starks?

In short peace and prosperity.

Yes an independent North might well be able to afford keeping all the men under arms it would need 'throw back armies from their region' as they did in the legendary days of the Old Kings of Winter, but then they were fighting other independent small kingdoms not the Iron Throne. The cost of keeping that sort of military going is going to mean some pretty heavy dues on the Smallfolk.

Collective security is the big gain for the North being in the Seven Kingdoms. Greyjoy's rebellion is a classic example of this the North doesn't have a fleet to fight off the Ironborn raids, doesn't matter because their friends in the rest of Westeros can provide one and more men so they can go smash the Ironborn together and come back to enjoy the peace. Now an independent North might well build its own fleet but that's going to cost more money and its going to keep costing more money as you have to maintain that fleet, money which might well be better spent elsewhere if you didn't have to pay for extra military forces to defend independence. The other concern is the rump Westerosi kingdoms no longer giving a damn about mutual Westerosi institutions like the Night's Watch that principally benefit the North, you get Tywin raising this in ASoS when he receives Lord Mormont's letter.

You also get the possibility of the King on the Iron Throne being able to come North and help out the Starks if they need it. The flipside of this is why the North may well fight every generation to defend independence - quite simply the North is part of the Seven Kingdoms ruled by the Iron Throne because it says so in the history books. The every sitter on the Iron Throne will read those history books and may well decide to try and exercise their ancestral rights to rule the North, - which will only be limited their will to do so and the resources to wage those wars which the Iron Throne will always have more than the King in the North. Okay you may get the odd peace-loving monarch who will let the Northerners enjoy their independence for the odd generation, but I bet the vast majority will want to try to reunify the country. Without either the Seven Kingdoms collapsing in a pre-conquest state (which basically means more war anyway) or the emergence of a Westerosi UN I can't really see an Independent North meaning anything other than the North constantly bleeding both blood and treasure.

An independent Kingdom of North is possible, but frankly I really don't think the amount of suffering the Northern people would have to go through to achieve it is really worth it,

That's my opinion anyway and that may well be the bittersweet ending of the story. One Northern peasant out in the snow in rags with his few remaining possessions on his back looks at his shack being burned in distance by raiders (of an army we neither know and it doesn't really matter) then turns his scowling wife and says

"Well dear, at least the Starks are Kings in the North and not sworn to the Iron Throne..."

[TheLastStark]

I live to please.

1) It shows that he knows better than to attack Tywin. Recognizing that someone is strong doesn't mean that he was crying about it. Tywin recognized that Stannis was a big threat, but he wasn't crying about it.

2) Balon got what he wanted. Revenge. He crushed the Starks and destroyed any chance of a Stark victory. Good for him. It would also be a lot more difficult for them to take the North had Balon lived than you're making it out to be.

3) You're disagreeing with GRRM, kid.

4) Wrong. She killed Jon Arryn because he was going to send SR to Stannis. She didn't give Brynden men to fight because she didn't care about their war, hates Hoster Tully and wanted to protect her son. LF probably planted the ideas in her head, but for the most part it was her being an over protective mother or her hatred for her father that guided her actions. Not like in the show.

5) That's why as Edmure's commander it's his responsibility to give his subordinates clear and concise orders.

1) Theon's not a piece of furniture and Robb can't offer Balon a crown because he doesn't have that authority. That was disrespectful. In reality Robb was begging Balon and other Highlords to win his war and give him a crown. The gold they would have gotten from the Westerlands wouldn't be given by Robb. It would have been taken by the Iron Born. They are not subjects they are not slaves. They're Iron Born. They take what is theirs.

2) Lysa did it for her son and not her people, but they undeniably benefitted from staying out of that stupid succession war.

3) That was creative liberties taken by the show writers. In the books he doesn't swear fealty to Robb because the son and heir of King Balon swearing fealty to a Stark doesn't make any sense. He became friends with Robb and not Jon because Robb was his social equal. He wouldn't subject himself to being Robb's vassal and if he did the Iron Born would never accept him as their leader.

4) The Red Wedding was crossing the line, but they had a legitimate grudge and some people don't seem to accept that.

5) I never said you said he was wrong, but a lot of people do.

6) The only thing Mace Tyrell layed siege to was a banquet table. Removing any threat to his castle comes first. Look what the Greyjoys did to the Starks.

7) They wouldn't have been stomped as bad as you're making it out to be and what they got was revenge.

8) Dorne wasn't going to join him.

9) It wasn't for selfish reasons. She did it to protect her son which is a perfectly legitimate reason. It just happened to benefit everyone in the Vale.

First if your female and look like your picture I would love to see what else you live to please for.

1)The Lannisters were anything but strong at that point. No allies, losing to a 15 year old, both Baratheons claiming the throne, Renly marching towards KL with the Tyrells(minus Redwynes). He wasn't in a very strong position at that point, was losing the war, and there is no way Balon knew how things were going to turn out. Yet he still feared Tywin? Robb lost because of his mistakes, nothing that Tywin did(unless you count setting up the RW which was most likely only possible because of Robb's mistakes and Cat's dumbass).

2)Revenge on two men who were already dead? Yes that makes sense. "I want revenge on Ned so I'll take his lands and attack his son, oh wait he's not here to see this". ROFL :rofl: Crushed the Starks. He never engaged the Starks, ever. And he never destroyed their chance at victory, at most it was just an inconvenience. It may have been harder to reclaim, but even your statement tells me that you know the Iron born wouldn't of been able to hold the north indefinitely.

3)#4 looks like it should be in 3's place. Don't know what I'm disagreeing with, maybe a quote and source would clear that fiasco up. And you call me kid with your "you don't like someone, and that someone attacked/neglected/indifferent the Starks, that's Stark bias that is" attitude.

4)“Tears, tears, tears,” she sobbed hysterically. “No need for tears... but that’s not what you said in King’s Landing. You told me to put the tears in Jon’s wine, and I did. For Robert, and for us! And I wrote Catelyn and told her the Lannisters had killed my lord husband, just as you said. That was so clever... you were always clever, I told Father that, I said Petyr’s so clever, he’ll rise high, he will, he will, and he’s sweet and gentle and I have his little baby in my belly... Why did you kiss her? Why? We’re together now, we’re together after so long, so very long, why would you want to kiss herrrrrr?” Do some research first, kid.

5)Again, yes it is, but again, protecting a castle is not the same as engaging in the field. Don't know why this is such a hard concept for you to grasp.

1)No he's not, he's the last living son of Balon(a lot more valuable I'd say), and instead of using the threat of death to Theon, he let him go free. What authority are you talking about? If Robb wins(and he was and looked as if it would continue), then he would be a king and be able to do as he pleased. Again, freeing his son is disrespectful? Asking for help is disrespectful? Offering him his own kingdom(which they want) and being a future ally against the IT is disrespectful? They would of kept the gold, Robb never asked for it, just for them to attack the Westerlands. And all they took was snow and wood. Not the best start to a kingdom.

2)LF and son, and IIRC the Vale wanted to enter the war as revenge for Jon(seeing as they thought the Lannisters killed him according to Lysa).

3)Your right, in the book it is not there. But Balon was not king or declaring to be king at that point in time. And why wouldn't it make sense. Even Renly said that when he took the throne, he didn't care what Robb called himself as long as he swore fealty to him. The deal was for an alliance, but he pissed on it for a grudge with a dead man and still wouldn't of been able to hold the north.

4)I understand the grudge, but the RW was way above any disrespect they ever got from the Starks.

5)Well they are idiots.

6)That's how a siege works, starve them out if you can't break down the walls. Renlys castle(if he declares himself king) is the Red Keep, so to your point, that's exactly where he should of went, then went back to SE. And the "Greyjoys" was really just a clever but unauthorized ruse by Theon. That was never the plan.

7)No they wouldn't, but even you have to admit that Robb would of won back his lands. And revenge on a dead man's son? Who just released your own son? If that's the case he had a huge stick up his ass.

8)He(and we) didn't know that at this point in the series. With everything we knew an offering of Tywin and the Mountains heads should of been enough to at least peak their interest.

9)It was selfish, she does not care about anyone in the Vale except herself, her son, and LF.

[kimim]

Knight of the Teabags:

This whole thing sort of resembles English history, and the North is a bit like Northern England in the 15th century. Economically, Northern England got clobbered after Richard III died and Henry VII took over. London prospered, the city of York went into a decline and never quite made it back. And then there are Scotland, Wales, Ireland. Whether Wales and Scotland benefited from being invaded/giving up their independence is debatable. Ireland sure as hell did not.

Independence isn't always a wonderful thing; being part of one kingdom isn't always a wonderful thing, either. There are no rules.

[Lee-Sensei]

First if your female and look like your picture I would love to see what else you live to please for.

1)The Lannisters were anything but strong at that point. No allies, losing to a 15 year old, both Baratheons claiming the throne, Renly marching towards KL with the Tyrells(minus Redwynes). He wasn't in a very strong position at that point, was losing the war, and there is no way Balon knew how things were going to turn out. Yet he still feared Tywin? Robb lost because of his mistakes, nothing that Tywin did(unless you count setting up the RW which was most likely only possible because of Robb's mistakes and Cat's dumbass).

2)Revenge on two men who were already dead? Yes that makes sense. "I want revenge on Ned so I'll take his lands and attack his son, oh wait he's not here to see this". ROFL :rofl: Crushed the Starks. He never engaged the Starks, ever. And he never destroyed their chance at victory, at most it was just an inconvenience. It may have been harder to reclaim, but even your statement tells me that you know the Iron born wouldn't of been able to hold the north indefinitely.

3)#4 looks like it should be in 3's place. Don't know what I'm disagreeing with, maybe a quote and source would clear that fiasco up. And you call me kid with your "you don't like someone, and that someone attacked/neglected/indifferent the Starks, that's Stark bias that is" attitude.

4)“Tears, tears, tears,” she sobbed hysterically. “No need for tears... but that’s not what you said in King’s Landing. You told me to put the tears in Jon’s wine, and I did. For Robert, and for us! And I wrote Catelyn and told her the Lannisters had killed my lord husband, just as you said. That was so clever... you were always clever, I told Father that, I said Petyr’s so clever, he’ll rise high, he will, he will, and he’s sweet and gentle and I have his little baby in my belly... Why did you kiss her? Why? We’re together now, we’re together after so long, so very long, why would you want to kiss herrrrrr?” Do some research first, kid.

5)Again, yes it is, but again, protecting a castle is not the same as engaging in the field. Don't know why this is such a hard concept for you to grasp.

1)No he's not, he's the last living son of Balon(a lot more valuable I'd say), and instead of using the threat of death to Theon, he let him go free. What authority are you talking about? If Robb wins(and he was and looked as if it would continue), then he would be a king and be able to do as he pleased. Again, freeing his son is disrespectful? Asking for help is disrespectful? Offering him his own kingdom(which they want) and being a future ally against the IT is disrespectful? They would of kept the gold, Robb never asked for it, just for them to attack the Westerlands. And all they took was snow and wood. Not the best start to a kingdom.

2)LF and son, and IIRC the Vale wanted to enter the war as revenge for Jon(seeing as they thought the Lannisters killed him according to Lysa).

3)Your right, in the book it is not there. But Balon was not king or declaring to be king at that point in time. And why wouldn't it make sense. Even Renly said that when he took the throne, he didn't care what Robb called himself as long as he swore fealty to him. The deal was for an alliance, but he pissed on it for a grudge with a dead man and still wouldn't of been able to hold the north.

4)I understand the grudge, but the RW was way above any disrespect they ever got from the Starks.

5)Well they are idiots.

6)That's how a siege works, starve them out if you can't break down the walls. Renlys castle(if he declares himself king) is the Red Keep, so to your point, that's exactly where he should of went, then went back to SE. And the "Greyjoys" was really just a clever but unauthorized ruse by Theon. That was never the plan.

7)No they wouldn't, but even you have to admit that Robb would of won back his lands. And revenge on a dead man's son? Who just released your own son? If that's the case he had a huge stick up his ass.

8)He(and we) didn't know that at this point in the series. With everything we knew an offering of Tywin and the Mountains heads should of been enough to at least peak their interest.

9)It was selfish, she does not care about anyone in the Vale except herself, her son, and LF.

1) It was about what Tywin did. Tywin is incredibly underrated. Betting on a green boy instead of Tywin Lannister would have been silly.

2) He engaged Stark bannermen, took large tracks of their North and destroyed their fledgling rebellion. They got their revenge. That's all that matters.

3) What?

4) Why don't you? She killed Jon Arryn so he wouldn't send sickly Robert away. LF told her how to do it and told her to send the letter to Cat so she wouldn't be under suspicion. That's what she thinks is so clever. She did these things for Robert and so she could be with LF, but Robert is at the heart of all her decisions and wanting to protet her son isn't selfish. It would have been selfish to drag thousands of Valemen into a stupid war to give her nephew a crown when most of them could probably careless about House Stark.

5) Why is this so hard for you to understand? Robb told him to hold Riverrun and he did. Edmure also protected his people. Robb knows what Edmures like and failed to give clear and concise orders. He failed.

“If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame." - Sun Tzu

6) Balon isn't Robb's vassal. Balon isn't Robbs subject or slave. Robb wanted other Highlords to win his war for him. As late as ASoS he was frantically begging Lysa to bail him out. He was far to arrogant. Balon doesn't need Robb's permission to crown himself and he doesn't need Robb's permission to go to war. Robb can't offer Balon anything because the Iron Islands isn't Robb's to give. The Iron Born take what is theirs. It was condescending.

7) Some of the Highlords wanted to go to war, but the common Valemen don't know that people believe the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn and would probably much rather stay out of some foreign kids idiotic war of succession. And protecting her son is the right thing to do. It would have been more selfish for her to drag thousands of men out to fight and die for some kid they don't care about.

8) Balon was an ex-King and Theon was an ex-Prince. Cat and Robb knew that Balon probably wanted to crown himself again. Swear fealty to who?

9) All I'm saying is that they had a legit reason to be angry.

10) His castle comes first. End of story. The Red Keep and Storms End were both his castles. Taking Winterfell was always the plan. Balon just planned on doing it later.

11) Nope. The way Balon sees it Robert and Ned killed his sons so it only makes sense for him to want to kill Ned's.

12) They made a deal with Tyrion pretty early on in ACoK.

13) It would have been even more selfish to drag 20000 men out to die in a war for some foreign kid they don't care about.

[The Wolves]

In short peace and prosperity.

Yes an independent North might well be able to afford keeping all the men under arms it would need 'throw back armies from their region' as they did in the legendary days of the Old Kings of Winter, but then they were fighting other independent small kingdoms not the Iron Throne. The cost of keeping that sort of military going is going to mean some pretty heavy dues on the Smallfolk.

Collective security is the big gain for the North being in the Seven Kingdoms. Greyjoy's rebellion is a classic example of this the North doesn't have a fleet to fight off the Ironborn raids, doesn't matter because their friends in the rest of Westeros can provide one and more men so they can go smash the Ironborn together and come back to enjoy the peace. Now an independent North might well build its own fleet but that's going to cost more money and its going to keep costing more money as you have to maintain that fleet, money which might well be better spent elsewhere if you didn't have to pay for extra military forces to defend independence. The other concern is the rump Westerosi kingdoms no longer giving a damn about mutual Westerosi institutions like the Night's Watch that principally benefit the North, you get Tywin raising this in ASoS when he receives Lord Mormont's letter.

You also get the possibility of the King on the Iron Throne being able to come North and help out the Starks if they need it. The flipside of this is why the North may well fight every generation to defend independence - quite simply the North is part of the Seven Kingdoms ruled by the Iron Throne because it says so in the history books. The every sitter on the Iron Throne will read those history books and may well decide to try and exercise their ancestral rights to rule the North, - which will only be limited their will to do so and the resources to wage those wars which the Iron Throne will always have more than the King in the North. Okay you may get the odd peace-loving monarch who will let the Northerners enjoy their independence for the odd generation, but I bet the vast majority will want to try to reunify the country. Without either the Seven Kingdoms collapsing in a pre-conquest state (which basically means more war anyway) or the emergence of a Westerosi UN I can't really see an Independent North meaning anything other than the North constantly bleeding both blood and treasure.

An independent Kingdom of North is possible, but frankly I really don't think the amount of suffering the Northern people would have to go through to achieve it is really worth it,

That's my opinion anyway and that may well be the bittersweet ending of the story. One Northern peasant out in the snow in rags with his few remaining possessions on his back looks at his shack being burned in distance by raiders (of an army we neither know and it doesn't really matter) then turns his scowling wife and says

"Well dear, at least the Starks are Kings in the North and not sworn to the Iron Throne..."

Why would the smallfolk bleed?

When have the Iron Throne ever came to the aid if the North? Who helped them fight the Wildlings, rebellious lords, Ironborn, etc.....?

The North has been independent for thousands of years protecting their own and they did it really well, just when have the North ever benefitted from being under the rule of the Iron Throne? When the Northernmen struggle in winter did the Iron Throne come to their aid? Or when the wall was up the NW looked to the Northernmen.

And White Harbor gets a lot of trade and Manderly is really rich he also has built a fleet I'm sure he's able to maintain a Northern fleet.

[Boarsbane]

Why would the smallfolk bleed?

When have the Iron Throne ever came to the aid if the North? Who helped them fight the Wildlings, rebellious lords, Ironborn, etc.....?

The North has been independent for thousands of years protecting their own and they did it really well, just when have the North ever benefitted from being under the rule of the Iron Throne? When the Northernmen struggle in winter did the Iron Throne come to their aid? Or when the wall was up the NW looked to the Northernmen.

And White Harbor gets a lot of trade and Manderly is really rich he also has built a fleet I'm sure he's able to maintain a Northern fleet.

The IT is the one who saved the North's ass when the North and West couldn't deal with Dagon

[John Doe]

And White Harbor gets a lot of trade and Manderly is really rich he also has built a fleet I'm sure he's able to maintain a Northern fleet.

Unfortunaley the fleet s on the wrong side of the continent, and therefore utterly useless.

[Boarsbane]

Unfortunaley the fleet s on the wrong side of the continent, and therefore utterly useless.

Manderly will just use his money to fund a fleet that is of no use to him whatsoever out of the goodness of his big Northern heart

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

Manderly will just use his money to fund a fleet that is of no use to him whatsoever out of the goodness of his big Northern heart

His plan to use it agains the Boltons and whatever ships the IT sends against him, it would seem.

[John Doe]

His plan to use it agains the Boltons and whatever ships the IT sends against him, it would seem.

A fleet is pretty much useless against the Boltons, and ways too weak to take on either the Royal Fleet or the Redwyne Fleet.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

A fleet is pretty much useless against the Boltons, and ways too weak to take on either the Royal Fleet or the Redwyne Fleet. A waste of time and ressources.

Blockade for the Boltons or to ship in food and resources, while the Redwyne fleet is occupied and weakened by the Ironborn, and the Royal has huge problems of it's own. Remember Aurane Waters and his Dromonds? Those had to be built to bulk up their numbers, but of course have gone pirate.

A fleet is always handy.

[Boarsbane]

Blockade for the Boltons or to ship in food and resources, while the Redwyne fleet is occupied and weakened by the Ironborn, and the Royal has huge problems of it's own. Remember Aurane Waters and his Dromonds? Those had to be built to bulk up their numbers, but of course have gone pirate.

A fleet is always handy.

A fleet on the western coast would be handy, one on the east coast not so much...

[John Doe]

A fleet on the western coast would be handy, one on the east coast not so much...

It can protect White Habour, but other than I doubt Manderly had a reason for building it.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

A fleet on the western coast would be handy, one on the east coast not so much...

Not against the Ironborn, not really.

But Manderly's full plans still have yet to be revealed, and won't be till TWOW.

[John Doe]

Blockade for the Boltons or to ship in food and resources,

And this is as useful as blocking Karholt or Last Hearth. Apart from White Habour the North does not rely on sea trade, nor does it need it.

And Manderly couldn't know that both the Royal and the Redwyne Fleet would both be needed elsewhere. Plus, both fleets can easily attack the North from the other side of coninent.

[Boarsbane]

It can protect White Habour, but other than I doubt Manderly had a reason for building it.

It isn't completely useless, but if it were on the western coast is would be a lot more useful. There aren't many threats on the eastern coast. The Arryns sound like they used to be but that has obviously passed. The IB on the other hand have raided the North on multiple occasions in the past 300 years.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

And this is as useful as blocking Karholt or Last Hearth. Apart from White Habour the North does not rely on sea trade, nor does it need it.

And Manderly couldn't know that both the Royal and the Redwyne Fleet would both be needed elsewhere. Plus, both fleets can attack the North from the other side of coninent.

Anyone that bothers to listen to what the sailors have been saying down on the docks knows current events, and knows that the Ironborn have expanded their raiding by the time ADWD takes place when Davos is shown Manderly expanding his fleet. He also knows about the beating the Royal Fleet has taken. If he wants to protect his Harbor, he needs a fleet.

He has one fleet up on the Bolton's. That's just plain helpful.

[Boarsbane]

Not against the Ironborn, not really.

But Manderly's full plans still have yet to be revealed, and won't be till TWOW.

You are right, there is no defense the Northmen have against the IB raiders and without the IT's protection it is open season for the IB.

[kimim]

1) It was about what Tywin did. Tywin is incredibly underrated. Betting on a green boy instead of Tywin Lannister would have been silly.

2) He engaged Stark bannermen, took large tracks of their North and destroyed their fledgling rebellion. They got their revenge. That's all that matters.

3) What?

4) Why don't you? She killed Jon Arryn so he wouldn't send sickly Robert away. LF told her how to do it and told her to send the letter to Cat so she wouldn't be under suspicion. That's what she thinks is so clever. She did these things for Robert and so she could be with LF, but Robert is at the heart of all her decisions and wanting to protet her son isn't selfish. It would have been selfish to drag thousands of Valemen into a stupid war to give her nephew a crown when most of them could probably careless about House Stark.

5) Why is this so hard for you to understand? Robb told him to hold Riverrun and he did. Edmure also protected his people. Robb knows what Edmures like and failed to give clear and concise orders. He failed.

“If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame." - Sun Tzu

6) Balon isn't Robb's vassal. Balon isn't Robbs subject or slave. Robb wanted other Highlords to win his war for him. As late as ASoS he was frantically begging Lysa to bail him out. He was far to arrogant. Balon doesn't need Robb's permission to crown himself and he doesn't need Robb's permission to go to war. Robb can't offer Balon anything because the Iron Islands isn't Robb's to give. The Iron Born take what is theirs. It was condescending.

7) Some of the Highlords wanted to go to war, but the common Valemen don't know that people believe the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn and would probably much rather stay out of some foreign kids idiotic war of succession. And protecting her son is the right thing to do. It would have been more selfish for her to drag thousands of men out to fight and die for some kid they don't care about.

8) Balon was an ex-King and Theon was an ex-Prince. Cat and Robb knew that Balon probably wanted to crown himself again. Swear fealty to who?

9) All I'm saying is that they had a legit reason to be angry.

10) His castle comes first. End of story. The Red Keep and Storms End were both his castles. Taking Winterfell was always the plan. Balon just planned on doing it later.

11) Nope. The way Balon sees it Robert and Ned killed his sons so it only makes sense for him to want to kill Ned's.

12) They made a deal with Tyrion pretty early on in ACoK.

13) It would have been even more selfish to drag 20000 men out to die in a war for some foreign kid they don't care about.

Re 6: Robb needed other lords to fight with him. He let them go to defend their own lands, and Catelyn sees this as a huge mistake. After his initial victories, Robb is bleeding men. This is a situation where a little less mercy would have helped Robb.

Re 8: Catelyn is always against letting Theon leave. She knows that the Greyjoys are potentially aggressive. She realizes that Theon was never a friend or a "son," but a hostage. She realizes that Theon would serve Robb best if he remained a hostage to keep Balon under control. Robb, however, lets him go, as he assumes all manner of crap that he shouldn't. Here, again, Robb would benefit from less idealism.

Re 13: Lysa is not a terribly likable person, but her decision to defend her own domain is a good one. It is clear that Robb is not the best general there is. Getting involved with the losing side would be a ridiculous move for her.