If People still hate the Freys, they need to reconsider their life priorities

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

4 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Well no, I was that the Freys did not invite Robb's army.

Ok, well I'm happy to cede that one because it's irrelevant.

 

5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

The crime is inside the twins, which was heinous, but outside it was war. 

The Northern army (well half of it) was unprepared much like the westerland army at oxcross

Sorry, but I feel like your wilfully ignoring the point I have made repeatedly - Oxcross was an ambush by a declared enemy. The attack on Robb's army at the Twins was a massacre by a supposed ally. I'm afraid if you don't at least address that point I can't be bothered to continue.

[Bernie Mac]

12 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Sorry, but I feel like your wilfully ignoring the point I have made repeatedly - Oxcross was an ambush by a declared enemy. The attack on Robb's army at the Twins was a massacre by a supposed ally. I'm afraid if you don't at least address that point I can't be bothered to continue.

Robb was well aware of them as a threat, in his own words he brought his army to protect him. 

Robb looked more amused than afraid. "I have an army to protect me, Mother, I don't need to trust in bread and salt. But if it pleases Lord Walder to serve me stewed crow smothered in maggots, I'll eat it and ask for a second bowl."

and lets get this straight, the northmen have had no problem with attacking factions who they were not at war with

"Damn the man," Robb swore. "If the old fool does not relent and let me cross, he'll leave me no choice but to storm his walls. I'll pull the Twins down around his ears if I have to, we'll see how well he likes that!"  = AGOT

=======================================================================

"You have done House Frey a grievous insult, Robb."

"I never meant to. Ser Stevron died for me, and Olyvar was as loyal a squire as any king could want. He asked to stay with me, but Ser Ryman took him with the rest. All their strength. The Greatjon urged me to attack them . . ."

"Fighting your own in the midst of your enemies?" she said. "It would have been the end of you." = ASOS

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

15 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Robb was well aware of them as a threat, in his own words he brought his army to protect him.

Yes, but they are still declared allies. Robb is right to be wary of allies like the Freys, but that doesn't mean the massacre wasn't an act of betrayal. It demonstrably was.

 

16 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

and lets get this straight, the northmen have had no problem with attacking factions who they were not at war with

"Damn the man," Robb swore. "If the old fool does not relent and let me cross, he'll leave me no choice but to storm his walls. I'll pull the Twins down around his ears if I have to, we'll see how well he likes that!"  = AGOT

If Robb had gone down that path, it would have been an act of open war, because the Freys refused to side with him. Very different from declaring an alliance and then betraying it.

 

17 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

The Greatjon urged me to attack them . . ."

"Fighting your own in the midst of your enemies?" she said. "It would have been the end of you." = ASOS

The Freys at that point were walking away from the alliance. Probably not the most honourable or sensible course of action, which is probably why Robbb didn't take it.

There are probably any number of examples of Northmen behaving less than honourably, it doesn't absolve Walder's actions.  

[Ralphis Baratheon]

48 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

The crime is inside the twins, which was heinous, but outside it was war. 

Does this battle have a name? I'v never heard anyone not even Freys or Crown loyalist refer to the killing of the Northern soldiers as a battle, The opposing sides at Oxcross never shared drink and food while they celebrated a wedding for their allied lords. 

[Bernie Mac]

3 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Yes, but they are still declared allies. Robb is right to be wary of allies like the Freys, but that doesn't mean the massacre wasn't an act of betrayal. It demonstrably was.

Yeah, just like Robb's betrayal. The Freys did their part of the deal and Robb betrayed them. 

3 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

If Robb had gone down that path, it would have been an act of open war, because the Freys refused to side with him. Very different from declaring an alliance and then betraying it.

Again, Robb betrayed the Freys first thus proving their 'words' to each other was meaningless. 

3 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

 

The Freys at that point were walking away from the alliance. Probably not the most honourable or sensible course of action, which is probably why Robbb didn't take it.

the Freys had more than comleted their side of the bargain, Robb betrayed them. 

3 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

There are probably any number of examples of Northmen behaving less than honourably, it doesn't absolve Walder's actions.  

it is not meant to, it is to point out the huge double standards. Put it this way, had Tywin, Balon or Walder attacked sleeping enemies not once but twice there would be thousands of posts on their awful behavior. 

 

5 minutes ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

Does this battle have a name? I'v never heard anyone not even Freys or Crown loyalist refer to the killing of the Northern soldiers as a battle, The opposing sides at Oxcross never shared drink and food while they celebrated a wedding for their allied lords. 

A battle, Arya knew. It's a battle. And the riders . . .

She had no more time to watch the tents then. With the river overflowing its banks, the dark swirling waters at the end of the drawbridge reached as high as a horse's belly, but the riders splashed through them all the same, spurred on by the music.

 

arya, an actual eyewitness, calling it a battle

 

 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

1 minute ago, Bernie Mac said:

Yeah, just like Robb's betrayal. The Freys did their part of the deal and Robb betrayed them. 

There's so obviously no moral equivalency between the two acts I can't really be bothered to explain it.

3 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

it is not meant to, it is to point out the huge double standards.

Ah, whataboutism then. Gotcha.

4 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

arya, an actual eyewitness, calling it a battle

That really is clutching at straws. All Arya knew was that she saw men fighting.

Everyone in the 7K lumps the entire act together. Why wouldn’t you? I’m sure during any number of atrocities you could point to some part of it or individual act and say “that, taken on its own, is technically not a war crime.” It’s a pointless exercise, and doesn’t exonerate the perpetrator. I honestly don’t understand why you would feel the need to do it.

[Bernie Mac]

22 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

There's so obviously no moral equivalency between the two acts I can't really be bothered to explain it.

Well actually there is.  Robb made an alliance, around 1,500 hundred Frey men died for that promise and then Robb decided he in fact did not want to hold up his part of the agreement. 

But in these discussions the amount of Frey's who lost their lives is always conveniently ignored

Quote

Ah, whataboutism then. Gotcha.

great comeback. 

Quote

That really is clutching at straws. All Arya knew was that she saw men fighting.

lol it was a battle, there were casualties on each side and an actual eye witness calls it a battle. 

how exactly is quoting from the books clutching at straws? 

 

edit: Cat also refers to it as a battle

Catelyn heard the crash of distant battle, and closer the wild howling of a wolf.

Quote

Everyone in the 7K lumps the entire act together.

everyone? come on, that is being hugely hyperbolic. 

 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Well actually there is.  Robb made an alliance, around 1,500 hundred Frey men died for that promise and then Robb decided he in fact did not want to hold up his part of the agreement. 

There is an obvious difference between someone foolishly and impulsively going back on his word, and someone calmly planning the massacre of thousands in retribution. It’s not like Robb actually planned the deaths of those Freys, or intended to go back on his word from the beginning.

In the immortal words of Steffon Fossoway, he was sincere at the time.

9 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

everyone? come on, that is being hugely hyperbolic. 

Not at all. Whenever we see anyone discussing or thinking about the Red Wedding, no-one makes the distinction between what happened outside the castle and what happened in it.

Probably because they would consider it unnecessary hair-splitting.

[Bernie Mac]

1 minute ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

There is an obvious difference between someone foolishly and impulsively going back on his word, and someone calmly planning the massacre of thousands in retribution.

Not always to the injured party there is not. It is impossible to generalize here, but some would think that Walder's betrayal, over himself being betrayed, is a better reason than Robb being impulsive. 

I myself find them about even, the consequences of their actions caused similar damage. 

1 minute ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

 

It’s not like Robb actually planned the deaths of those Freys, or intended to go back on his word from the beginning.

lol well I guess that makes it ok then. 

1 minute ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

In the immortal words of Steffon Fossoway, he was sincere at the time.

which means sweet FA to the dead or to Walder. 

1 minute ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Not at all. Whenever we see anyone discussing or thinking about the Red Wedding, no-one makes the distinction between what happened outside the castle and what happened in it.

both Cat and Arya call it a battle. 

Catelyn heard the crash of distant battle, and closer the wild howling of a wolf.

two people who were actually there. 

 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

30 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

lol well I guess that makes it ok then. 

No it doesn't, it just makes it better.

31 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

both Cat and Arya call it a battle. 

Well it was a battle in a sense,given people were fighting. The point @RalphisBaratheon was making, I guess, was that no-one calls in “The Battle of the Twins” or anything like that. They call the whole thing the Red Wedding.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter, the point is the morality of the act, both as it’s seen in the 7k and in the real world. That’s why I referred to this line of argument as clutching at straws. You could find 100 characters who casually refer to it as a “battle” when witnessing it, it doesn’t make it a legitimate act of war.

[Universal Sword Donor]

1 hour ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

There is an obvious difference between someone foolishly and impulsively going back on his word, and someone calmly planning the massacre of thousands in retribution. It’s not like Robb actually planned the deaths of those Freys, or intended to go back on his word from the beginning.

In the immortal words of Steffon Fossoway, he was sincere at the time.

Not at all. Whenever we see anyone discussing or thinking about the Red Wedding, no-one makes the distinction between what happened outside the castle and what happened in it.

Probably because they would consider it unnecessary hair-splitting.

When you're literally raising roofs and providing barrels of ale and tuns of wine for the army outside, I cannot imagine why

[Moiraine Sedai]

13 hours ago, Only 89 selfies today said:

 

The red wedding is a very bad act of treachery.  I think Walder even knows that.  He was in a bad position and just didn't have any good alternative.  

I want to compare Walder Frey to Jaime Lannister.  I know, this will p/o a lot of goldie's fans.  Sorry about that.

Jaime Lannister pushed a helpless little Bran out of the tower window.  He was doing something that can't be known by anyone; otherwise, the woman he loved and their children would die.  So his fans give him a break.  

Walder Frey was an innocent bystander when Gregor Clegane attacked his small folk because of what Catelyn did.  He gets forced to choose between helping the Starks or siding with the Lannisters.  Either choice carries a lot of risk.  Not choosing and staying neutral also carries a lot of risk.  Remember what the Tullys did to House Goodbrooke for staying neutral.   Walder actually has better reasons than Jaime. 

The Freys did nothing wrong.  They were innocents that got dragged into the war.  Jaime and Cersei are not innocents.  Walder's children and his grandchildren are innocent.  As are Joffrey, Tommen, and Myrcella.  Jaime has to worry about the safety of five people.  Walder had the safety of his family in the balance.  He could lose The Twins.  My opinion, Walder is more justified for the red wedding than Jaime's attempted murder of Bran Stark.  

Walder Frey is a much better man than Jaime Lannister.  He carried out his part of the agreement with Robb.  He supports his children.  Jaime betrayed Aerys and Robert.   

[Hugorfonics]

"Then winkle them out of their pyramids on some pretext. A wedding might serve. Why not? Promise your hand to Hizdahr and all the Great Masters will come to see you married. When they gather in the Temple of the Graces, turn us loose upon them."

Dany was appalled. He is a monster. A gallant monster, but a monster still.

 

 

The great masters are the worst. Theyre, at the least, harboring terrorists and murderers in the hopes that Yunaki and Volantis can reinslave all Targ loyalists and butcher the last dragons.

Yet still Dany sees this scheme as monstrous. Frey is no different, what they did is monstrous. Thank gods for Stoneheart

[Bernie Mac]

7 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

No it doesn't, it just makes it better.

No, it really does not. Men had already died for Robb's promise and he decided he simply no longer cared to honor the agreement he made after the other party had paid in full and suffered for it. 

What Robb did was just as bad. 

7 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Well it was a battle in a sense,given people were fighting. The point @RalphisBaratheon was making, I guess, was that no-one calls in “The Battle of the Twins” or anything like that. They call the whole thing the Red Wedding.

The point the two of you were making was that it was not a battle,  now one character in the book calling it a battle was not good enough for you but two people doing so has made you backtrack. 

7 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Ultimately it doesn’t matter, the point is the morality of the act, both as it’s seen in the 7k and in the real world. That’s why I referred to this line of argument as clutching at straws. You could find 100 characters who casually refer to it as a “battle” when witnessing it, it doesn’t make it a legitimate act of war.

and attacking a sleeping army of untrained green boys is? 

once again it the constant double standards the fandom has in excusing one side's poor behavior over the others. 

[Kandrax]

11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

and attacking a sleeping army of untrained green boys is? 

No law forbides attacking sleeping army.

[Bernie Mac]

36 minutes ago, Kandrax said:

No law forbides attacking sleeping army.

No law forbides attacking a drunk army

[Unacosamedarisa]

24 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

No law forbides attacking a drunk army

Except the Sacred Law of Guest Right. Which the Freys broke at the Red Wedding. 

Quote

"Though once I had eaten at his board I was protected by guest right. The laws of hospitality are as old as the First Men, and sacred as a heart tree." 

Quote

"'Tis scarcely chivalrous to threaten your host over his own cheese and olives," the Lord of the Dreadfort scolded. "In the north, we hold the laws of hospitality sacred still."

Quote

"Murdered in breach of all the sacred laws of hospitality."

 

12 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

and attacking a sleeping army of untrained green boys is? 

once again it the constant double standards the fandom has in excusing one side's poor behavior over the others. 

That you see the two events as equivalent is quite telling also, of the twisting of events that's required to maintain this contrarian position of yours. The Battle of Oxcross was in no way equivalent to the Red Wedding... One was a surprise attack on an enemy army, during a war. The other was a betrayal of allies, which broke one of the most sacred laws of society. 

[Bernie Mac]

11 minutes ago, Unacosamedarisa said:

Except the Sacred Law of Guest Right. Which the Freys broke at the Red Wedding. 

Yeah. the guests were protected, the army outside were not. 

"I'm more wet than hungry . . ."

"Robb, listen to me. Once you have eaten of his bread and salt, you have the guest right, and the laws of hospitality protect you beneath his roof."

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Edwyn cleared his throat. "We have chambers prepared for you in the Water Tower, Your Grace," he told Robb with careful courtesy, "as well as for Lord Tully and Lady Stark. Your lords bannermen are also welcome to shelter under our roof and partake of the wedding feast."

"And my men?" asked Robb.

 "My lord grandfather regrets that he cannot feed nor house so large a host. 

 

They were neither under his roof nor were they given bread and salt (food), they were never his guests. 

 

Quote

 

That you see the two events as equivalent is quite telling also, of the twisting of events that's required to maintain this contrarian position of yours.

Oh don't be so sensitive to the idea that not everyone is going to share your opinion all the time. 

Quote

The Battle of Oxcross was in no way equivalent to the Red Wedding...

It actually was. Not the events inside the Twins, that was certainly a heinous crime, but certainly the battle outside. 

 

[Unacosamedarisa]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

It actually was.

It actually wasn't. One was a surprise attack by a declared enemy. The other was a declared ally inviting an army to a celebration, and then turning on them.

If Robb had gone to negotiate with Stafford Lannister, signed a truce, then attacked him in the night... that would be somewhat equivalent. 

If a Lannister army had surprised Robb's during the Red Wedding celebrations... that would be somewhat equivalent. 

But those things didn't happen. 

[MostlyMoody]

Robb was an idiot. Good commander, but in every other aspect he was terrible in dealing with this war. The crucial mistake was breaking his oath to Walder by marrying Jeyne. From Walders perspective the only reason he had made the alliance with the North was now gone, so he betrayed Robb, seeing as how the promise meant nothing to the King in the North.

Now, this in no way excuses the butchery at Red Wedding. If we are looking at this strictly from the societal standards of Westeros (which are abhorrent), Robb and Walder were still allies. The 'right' way to do this for Walder would be to declare for the crown officially sending letters to all relevant parties. Tywin conspired with Walder and Roose to end the war quickly by assassinating Robb and it worked. It wasn't moral or right, even within Westerosi law which is why everyone in the story with any moral backbone despises Freys, not just readers, characters within this fictional world despise the Freys.

Why Freys in general not just Walder? Because all but 3 or 4 were present and in on the scheme.

I rest my case, and may the jury be fair and just in their decision.