Did Tywin have to kill Rheagar's children

[Kandrax]

5 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

It would to the Dornish, and to the rest of the realm. Revenge would be justified for the killer and the person who made the decision to kill. If that decision originated with Clegane, then that is where the retribution should end. If the decision came from Tywin...

If Tywin is responsible without giving the order, then ultimately, the responsibility should fall on Robert, since it was all done in his name, even if he didn't give the order either.

Unlike Tywin, Robert wasn't Gregor's boss, and in RL military commanders are trialed for command responsibility.

[John Suburbs]

6 minutes ago, Kandrax said:

Unlike Tywin, Robert wasn't Gregor's boss, and in RL military commanders are trialed for command responsibility.

Um, well, Robert was the leader of the rebellion, and at this point Tywin was fighting to put Robert on the throne, and then Robert did nothing to Tywin (or Gregor or Lorch) when he placed the dead children at his feet, and in fact raised him up to be one of the most powerful lords in the realm by marrying his daughter... So it's hard to see how Tywin would be responsible for a command he never gave simply because he was Gregor's boss but Robert is not responsible for a command he never gave, since he is Tywin's boss.

[Kandrax]

3 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Um, well, Robert was the leader of the rebellion, and at this point Tywin was fighting to put Robert on the throne, and then Robert did nothing to Tywin (or Gregor or Lorch) when he placed the dead children at his feet, and in fact raised him up to be one of the most powerful lords in the realm by marrying his daughter... So it's hard to see how Tywin would be responsible for a command he never gave simply because he was Gregor's boss but Robert is not responsible for a command he never gave, since he is Tywin's boss.

At that moment, Tywin was Robert's ally.

[John Suburbs]

18 hours ago, Kandrax said:

At that moment, Tywin was Robert's ally.

Not really, by the time of the sack and the murders, Robert had declared his intention to take the crown. So that means Tywin was subordinate and Robert was running the show.

Of course, this does not mean that the Martells would not want the deaths of both Tywin and Robert as justice for Elia and the children. It's just that if they extend responsibility for those murders to Tywin regardless of whether he issued the actual order or not, then logically they should extend it to Robert as well, because he was ultimately responsible for what happened.

Whether the Martells behave logically is an entirely different question.

 

[Kandrax]

5 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Not really, by the time of the sack and the murders, Robert had declared his intention to take the crown. So that means Tywin was subordinate and Robert was running the show.

Of course, this does not mean that the Martells would not want the deaths of both Tywin and Robert as justice for Elia and the children. It's just that if they extend responsibility for those murders to Tywin regardless of whether he issued the actual order or not, then logically they should extend it to Robert as well, because he was ultimately responsible for what happened.

Whether the Martells behave logically is an entirely different question.

 

OK both of them are responsible.

[Geddus]

On 8/2/2018 at 2:09 AM, John Suburbs said:

If he handed the children to Robert, he most likely would have spared them and they would have grown into a young man and young woman and the odds are very high that they would have had to fight the whole war all over again at some point in the future. It's a question of being absolutely certain that this cannot happen and just hoping that it cannot happen.

Elia sent back home, Aegon taken as a "guest" by Ned (maybe sent to the Watch as soon as possible, to be extra careful) and Rhaenys betrothed to Robert's firstborn son would have prevented any problems from them while at the same time severely weakening any other Targaryen claimant's position. I'm sure Tywin realized this, which is why I think he was in fact lying to Tyrion when he said Rhaegar's children had to die for the new regime to be stable.

[John Suburbs]

44 minutes ago, Geddus said:

Elia sent back home, Aegon taken as a "guest" by Ned (maybe sent to the Watch as soon as possible, to be extra careful) and Rhaenys betrothed to Robert's firstborn son would have prevented any problems from them while at the same time severely weakening any other Targaryen claimant's position. I'm sure Tywin realized this, which is why I think he was in fact lying to Tyrion when he said Rhaegar's children had to die for the new regime to be stable.

Aegon kept as a guest and then sent to the wall while forcing Rhaenys into a marriage designed to suit Robert's interests rather than Dorne's (and separating them from their mother in the bargain) would have inflamed Dorne and probably prevented the peace that Jon Arryn was able to so skillfully craft. Not to mention the logistical nightmare of keeping these children under control for the next 15 years or more so they could not be used to foment another rebellion. Heck, even if someone did not kidnap them, they could still inspire a drive to overthrow the usurper.

Also, these would be clear-cut decisions by Robert himself, rather than the actions of a lord who had not even sworn to Robert's cause at that point, and at a time when Robert was still hundreds of leagues away. With Tywin making these decisions himself, he can claim that all was done in Robert's name while Robert can claim he had nothing to do with it.

Killing the children removes any and all doubt that they can cause new trouble for the realm, while letting them live puts the future security of the new dynasty in jeopardy. Simple, cold, hard, political logic, which is the hallmark of Tywin's way of thinking.

[Geddus]

I really don't think that keeping Elia and her children alive would have inflamed Dorne more than slaughtering them did.

Aegon living in Winterfell wouldn't have been a logistical nightmare at all, I don't see any loyalist being able to get to him there; Rhaenys would have been trickier but nothing too hard. All in all I think in the long run it would have been more advantageous to show some mercy.

[John Suburbs]

On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 6:16 PM, Geddus said:

I really don't think that keeping Elia and her children alive would have inflamed Dorne more than slaughtering them did.

Aegon living in Winterfell wouldn't have been a logistical nightmare at all, I don't see any loyalist being able to get to him there; Rhaenys would have been trickier but nothing too hard. All in all I think in the long run it would have been more advantageous to show some mercy.

Robert at least has some measure of plausible deniability for their deaths. He did not give the order, he was not there and Tywin had not sworn fealty to him. True, he didn't punish Tywin, but right up to Gregor's confession the story was that their deaths were just a terrible accident -- civilian casualties of war.

This would not be the case if Robert were holding them hostage, forcing Aegon to take the black even though he committed no crime, and forcing Rhaenys to marry his heir. He would own their fates outright, and no one would be singing Robert's praises because, well, at least he hasn't killed them.

Somebody was able to get a catspaw into Winterfell to kill Bran. It isn't unthinkable that someone could kidnap Aegon. And as I mentioned, this would not even be necessary in order for others to start a counter-rebellion in his name. There mere fact that he is alive makes him a threat -- just as Viserys and Dany are.

It would not have been advantageous to Tywin, and he is the one making the decision here. Not only would his commitment to Robert be less solid, but they both represent the focal point for counter-rebellion.

[cpg2016]

On 2/28/2018 at 5:26 PM, Kandrax said:

OK both of them are responsible.

Both of them are 100% not responsible.

Tywin is rightly considered to have given the order, and his detractors are suspicious of his denials, because of his actions!  First off, he has a carefully cultivated reputation as a man willing to commit serious war crimes and escalate violence in a major way to make his "enemies" fear him.  For example, his ordering of the Sack of Kings Landing despite the city peacefully opening its gates is a major black mark against him here.  His argument that Elia and her kids die in the confusion is obvious bullshit, because the "confusion" was entirely of his own making anyway, even if he doesn't directly order the murders.  Second, his actions after the murders.  He presents the bodies as gifts to Robert, wrapped in Lannister cloaks.  This is an explicit endorsement of not only their deaths, but the manner in which they died.  He is literally cloaking the murders in Lannister colors.  Nothing stopped him from reporting on their unfortunate and accidental death.  No, he wrapped up his own Lannister image in their corpses, and a more clear declaration of intent and endorsement cannot be imagined.  So even without knowing whether Tywin told Gregor and Amory Lorch to kill Elia and her kids (and he all but admits that he did to Tyrion), he deliberately creates the conditions in which such a murder can happen, and condones and trumpets the results.  As he says, he didn't really need them killed so brutally, but that's not a defense.

Robert, by contrast, never orders the deaths of those two and its noted a few times that he would have been uncomfortable with the thought of murdering children.  Tywin was 100% NOT Robert's subordinate at this time, so even that already-stupid argument should be discarded.  That Robert's life was made easier by their death (and that was the whole point of Tywin killing them, as he lampshades) does not imply responsibility or intent.  There needs to be some indication that Tywin was acting on Robert's orders or expressed wishes for Robert to bear responsibility here, and that is explicitly not the case.  And since Tywin is not a vassal or subordinate or even ally of Robert's at this point, not even to the tiniest degree, Robert bears no responsibility even in the sense that the actions of a subordinate flow up the chain of command.

[Kandrax]

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Tywin told Gregor and Amory Lorch to kill Elia 

We don't know whether Tywin ordered or not Elia's death.

 

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

, his ordering of the Sack of Kings Landing 

We also don't know whether he ordered it or just let his soldiers sack city.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

uncomfortable

"I  see no babes. Only dragonspawn".

That Robert?

8 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Tywin was 100% NOT Robert's subordinat

True, but Robert duty as king was to punish him or at least his men.

[cpg2016]

21 hours ago, Kandrax said:

We don't know whether Tywin ordered or not Elia's death.

 

His little chat with Tyrion makes it pretty clear.  He's not upset about the murders, but about the manner in which they were done.  He doesn't rebuke Tyrion for asking if he ordered their deaths, only for asking if he thought he ordered their rapes as well.

21 hours ago, Kandrax said:

We also don't know whether he ordered it or just let his soldiers sack city.

It's the same thing.  He's the commander of that army - if the city is sacked, it's his fault.  And since everyone in universe holds Tywin responsible, we should too.  The city opened its gates peacefully and was sacked anyway; that is 100% on him.

21 hours ago, Kandrax said:

"I  see no babes. Only dragonspawn".

That Robert?

Words are wind.

And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children.

Robert would have been uneasy killing children.  It is much easier to say that than to do it.  How many times have you thought or said "I could kill him/her"?  How often have you killed someone in cold blood?  Yeah...

21 hours ago, Kandrax said:

True, but Robert duty as king was to punish him or at least his men.

Sure, I agree, and it sucks that the exigencies of politics got in the way... but what does this have to do with the main thrust?  Tywin, not Robert, is responsible for what happened during the Sack.

[Kandrax]

1 hour ago, cpg2016 said:

their rapes

Their? Only Elia was raped.

 

1 hour ago, cpg2016 said:

It's the same thing.  He's the commander of that army - if the city is sacked, it's his fault.  And since everyone in universe holds Tywin responsible, we should too.  The city opened its gates peacefully and was sacked anyway; that is 100% on him.

Aggre.

 

1 hour ago, cpg2016 said:

Robert would have been uneasy killing childre

Still wasn't uneasy to sent an assassin to kill 13-year old and her unborn child until his deathbed.

Also, quote doesn't tell us anything. It can just be Tywin's statement that heroes don't hurt children.

[John Suburbs]

On ‎5‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 7:07 PM, Kandrax said:

We also don't know whether he ordered it or just let his soldiers sack city.

The sack had to be intentional. There was no other way to get Lannister soldiers close enough to the Red Keep to get Jaime out alive. The second Tywin openly breaks with Aerys, Jaime is a dead man. That's the only reason Aerys kept him in the RK out of all the available Kingsguard.

Aerys has plenty of his own men in the Red Keep, so there is no reason why Tywin would need to march a force in that direction as part of his duty to defend the city. All of Tywin's men are at the city gates and walls, which puts them several miles from the Red Keep, and the bulk of them would have to fight there way over or around Visneya's Hill to get there. What to do? Start a riot and pretend that your soldiers are attempting to put it down. With this as cover, and conflicting stories as to who is doing what out in the city, Tywin has a plausible means of getting enough men to storm the RK gate while his top knights scale the walls to remove the royal family and get help to Jaime. Even if there are still a few (or even scores) of loyalists not fighting off the attack at the gate, three top knights like Jaime, Crakehall and Westerling should be able to hold their own long enough for reinforcements to arrive.

Once the sack began, of course, there was no way to stop it.

[Jaak]

On 6/1/2018 at 11:23 PM, cpg2016 said:

Words are wind.

And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children.

Robert would have been uneasy killing children.  It is much easier to say that than to do it. 

Words are wind, but so are symbolic actions like wrapping the corpses in Lannister cloaks.

Both Tywin and Robert are avowing responsibility after the fact.

Despite his palpable relief, Robert might have chosen to distance himself from the murders by upbraiding Gregor and Amory for killing the family rather than take them alive, and yet make no actual punishment for themselves. For example, he forced Jaime to kneel to ask for pardon, and Jaime got it. Robert might have made a point of ordering Gregor and Amory to kneel and ask for pardon, and get it, while Jaime is told to remain standing because he has nothing to ask pardon for in killing a known adult enemy of Robert.

Robert chose not to do so.