Were Ned, Robert and Jon Arryn the villains of the rebellion?

[Joey Crows]

On 12/18/2018 at 1:41 AM, The Wolves said:

Before the rebellion no, after it was all said and done than yes Ned, Jon, and Robert can be said to be the villains of the rebellion. Ned is my favorite ASOIAF character and one of my all time favs. But I side eye him and everyone who put Robert Baratheon on that ugly chair when that wasn’t the main objective during the rebellion. 

Yup. Ned never plotted anything in his life I think. And Robert was in it for revenge, while Jon probably felt the need to support two people he loved who happened to be from powerful houses that could've dragged the Vale into the war anyway. After all that though, putting Robert on the throne made the whole venture political, thus all three were responsible for the overthrow of the Targ dynasty. Which viewed through the lens of history makes them villains. (At least until people began to find Robert's reign more pleasant than what came before)

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

2 hours ago, Joey Crows said:

Yup. Ned never plotted anything in his life I think. And Robert was in it for revenge, while Jon probably felt the need to support two people he loved who happened to be from powerful houses that could've dragged the Vale into the war anyway. After all that though, putting Robert on the throne made the whole venture political, thus all three were responsible for the overthrow of the Targ dynasty. Which viewed through the lens of history makes them villains. (At least until people began to find Robert's reign more pleasant than what came before)

Robert's reign is not going to be remembered more fondly than the reign of Aerys.  Robert's reign will be remembered as the time when Westeros went downhill.  House Baratheon will be remembered negatively for their mismanagement of the kingdom.  

[Universal Sword Donor]

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

 

So this is your main argument? That Aerys had responsibilities that Ramsay, Euron and seemingly every other character lacked? 

Yes. Shadows loom large when the sun demands it.

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

I cant support that, if anything it should justify some of Aerys' motives behind events like Duskendale or Brandon and Rikards death.

DD, sure. later? no

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Aerys killed lords and traitors, its really not much different then Stannis. 

Quite a bit different. Stannis, as far as we know, hasn't demanded the heads of innocents or killed people without trial. Even the burnings, save Alester (?), were for 'good' reason.

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Even with Euron controlling his kingdom for only a few months its worse then Aerys' kingdom was anyday. Ships are being packed with citizens becoming enslaved, that never happend under Aerys.

Like I said, Euron will most likely eclipse Aerys II

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

To free his uncles. By the time Edmure and Hoster were freed Joffrey had killed Ned. Tyrion says it plainly enough to the acknowledgment of his father, Joffrey destroyed all chances of peace talks, to the sorrows of Sansa, Jaime, practically every smallfolk and noble, and Ned.

Won't deny any of that, but it means little and less to the assertion that Joff was responsible for Robb coming south

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Which Euron proceeded to retreat from and turn his attention on a much bloodier war. 

Valid

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

What did Osama Bin Ladin do besides 9/11? Answer probably a bunch, no lord rules with clean hands. And does it matter? He committed mass murder and betrayal. He also doomed his own family who are now the scorne of all man (and gods) even their Lannister friends. 

Yes? Does the sentence change? No but that doesn't mean he wasn't to blame for the 98 bombing and the luxor bombing

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Aerys may have commited that much amount of murder but thanks to Jaime the largest crime scene was at the Twins

Uh that had little and less to do with Jaime. That was done before he even got back to KL

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

He killed Jon Arryn and framed his muder on Lannister, he then framed Tyrion and helped defeat Ned, all of this was to the benefit of creating the war of 5 Kings; to which Petyr replies with a smile on his face, the war of 3 Queens is coming.

Cersei let him die. Pycelle said as much. He screwed Ned over, but the war was well in hand at that point

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Dude is THE arch villain.

To the knowledge of maybe 5-10?

15 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Sure, whos not? Grimey people Dornish and Ironlanders or the Golden Company that wont ever shut up. I understand why Robert ordered a hit on Dany like her father ordered one on him, its horrible but its the price of keeping your head and crown. Other characters have not been faced with that dilemma yet still act extra atrociously 

Literally everyone but the Targs

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 12/19/2018 at 9:58 AM, Arthur Peres said:

Robert cannot change the sucession in a whim, look what happened at the dance of dragons, when Viserys II did it.

Even if he abdicated and left Tommem to be the new king, he cannot be sure of who will be his regent, and the most obvious candidate for the role is Cersei.

Robert could not leave the IT. The best resolution for the kingdom would be Robert outliving Joffrey and Cersei.

Naming Tommen heir should be the last resort if Robert’s fears of Joffery as he was were what they said they were-but sort of that Robert could try changing the boy, through setting a proper example of what a king ought to do, trying to get him to empathize with other people etc. And to be clear I’m not saying Robert would have definitely succeeded in improving Joffery; it’s just that he should have tried. Seriously, just a little thing such as making sure Joffery’s bodyguard was a man of honor, someone who could be hoped to be a positive influence on the young king; instead of just allowing the Hound the job. The Hound who whose first words in story is basically giving encouragement to the boy’s bad behavior. Seriously, the Hound offers to kill Bran.  Hell, at the very least, Robert could have not disclaimed how he thought cripples should be euthanized in front of the boy. 

You know Randyl Tarly like his parenting methods or hate him, he could tell he genuinely wanted to change Sam into a man being up to the task of leading his house. You could tell he wanted to fix Sam for a long time and eventually just gave up hope after trying everything he could think of.

But failing to improve the boy , the possibility of passing him over for Tommen is reasonable. If Robert thinks a blithering incompetent, like him, is better than Joffery than it’s unreasonable for him to think when Joffery becomes King he is unlikely to do something to launch the country into a civil war. And to be clear I don’t mean just  disinheriting him and leaving it at that; the NW would be happy to have the Crown prince join  their ranks. Basically do a Tarly and force Joffery to take the black. Hell he could have done it by the time of AGOT. The NW took in a ten year old Stark boy  and made that boy Lord commander. I suspect the boy was coerced into joking the brotherhood because he also had relatives who saw his claim to be potentially seen as greater than theirs.

He could not be sure of anything. But Cersi  being isn’t guaranteed the regency if Robert names a Regent who could oppose her. The problem with naming  Ned, upon his death bed, is that Ned, never got around to forming his own power base in KL. Making it very easy for Cersi to recklessly disregard his will. He in general was a poor choice. The most qualified regent, in my opinion would have been Tywin. His appointment won’t be seen as an attack on House Lannister, he’s an excellent polo Ian with a reputation of effectiveness, and who would find little opposition in the way of Cersi. 

The man is obese, and drinks alcohol daily. He jokes to Ned he fully expects his lifestyle to lead him to an early grave. It’d be unreasonable for him to expect to outlive, his 11 year old(whose in pretty good shape health wise) son and wife.

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 12/19/2018 at 7:50 PM, FictionIsntReal said:

He wanted to (not a very responsible notion),

I disagree with this idea of not wanting a responsibility is the same as being irresponsible. Sometimes,the responsible thing to do is to not take responsibility for something. Like, if you’re terrible at communication, choosing to not take up a high paying managerial position at your company where you’ll be expected to communicate well, is IMO way more responsible than taking the position that you’re not prepared for. 

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 12/19/2018 at 7:50 PM, FictionIsntReal said:

Regarding whether anything could have been done about Joffrey, I'm somewhat skeptical. Jon Arryn tried to foster his son and his wife killed him for it. Cersei would be unlikely to tolerate Robert interfering with her raising of Joffrey, and she has both the clout of the Lannister family (from which the crown has borrowed lots of money) and the allegiance of people close enough to Robert to kill him.

Yeah, House Lannister, I don’t see raising it’s banners in response to Robert disciplining his son. Cersi would not tolerate beating Joffery(a fair sentiment given you’re not supposed to beat royalty), but I don’t see her speeding up her plans to kill him by virtue of Robert bringing him to a council meeting now and again to give the boy a good example or encouraging him to be good. 

And Robert could fail to improve Joffery. The point is he never really tried; he pushed that responsibility on to Ned in the last moments of his life.

[867-5309]

On 12/20/2018 at 9:01 PM, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Robert's reign is not going to be remembered more fondly than the reign of Aerys.  Robert's reign will be remembered as the time when Westeros went downhill.  House Baratheon will be remembered negatively for their mismanagement of the kingdom.  

The Baratheons dragged the kingdom into the dark ages.  They ruined it all.

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 12/16/2018 at 8:19 PM, Universal Sword Donor said:

That is an excellent way to phrase it. I had not thought of it in that light.

I must admit, I have doubts on this being a point against House Tully, and House Stark conspiring to usurp the Targyens. It could be Brandon, was never privy to his father’s plot. Robert apparently wasn’t in the know of any conspiracy it seems to me. And Rickard could have simply thought he had no other chance to save his son but to answer Aery’s call even if he knew what type of man Aerys was. It would be fooling certainly, but perhaps concern for Rickard’s son in this instance simply overcame his reason. 

[Hugorfonics]

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Yes. Shadows loom large when the sun demands it.

Lol, idk what that means. 

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

DD, sure. later? no

Thats the two dead Starks? As we were saying earlier, whether the Northern Conspiracy was for offense or defense, it was not in Aerys favor (especially with Varys reporting the news). This can be justified as getting rid of (almost) known enemies of the state, similar to Robert/Tywin's dragonspawn or Roberts assassin on Dany.

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Quite a bit different. Stannis, as far as we know, hasn't demanded the heads of innocents or killed people without trial. Even the burnings, save Alester (?), were for 'good' reason.

Who did Aerys kill that was innocent?(Stark was calling for the death of the heir) I mean really innocent like Joff killing hungry civilians or ordering the death of Mycha.

And to hell with Florent, a Hand surrendering his kingdom to a usurper is the definition of treason. But Sunglass being burnt after Blackwater for not supporting Rhloor or the soldiers who were burnt for eating dead folk is quite excessive.

And Stannis did demand the head of an innocent. He was planning on burning his child nephew and daughters friend Edric.

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Like I said, Euron will most likely eclipse Aerys II

I dont see how hes less villainous already with all the enslavement and such.

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Won't deny any of that, but it means little and less to the assertion that Joff was responsible for Robb coming south

No, but it makes him responsible for his war. 

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Uh that had little and less to do with Jaime. That was done before he even got back to KL

Sorry, my post wasnt very clear. I meant that if Jaime never killed Aerys then Aerys would have been the biggest murderer in Westerosi history but since he did that infamous title goes to Walder. 

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Cersei let him die. Pycelle said as much. He screwed Ned over, but the war was well in hand at that point

To the knowledge of maybe 5-10?

Pycelle let him die, Cersei tells her brothers shes innocent, I belive that. Pycelle was just an idiot, Lysa gave him Tears of Lys, Jon was a goner no matter what. 

Nah man, the war of 5 kings wouldnt have happend if it werent for Petyr.

To the knowledge of the reader.

On 12/21/2018 at 2:44 AM, Universal Sword Donor said:

Literally everyone but the Targs

Or, ya know, the Lannisters that killed him.

[Arthur Peres]

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Naming Tommen heir should be the last resort if Robert’s fears of Joffery as he was were what they said they were-but sort of that Robert could try changing the boy, through setting a proper example of what a king ought to do, trying to get him to empathize with other people etc. And to be clear I’m not saying Robert would have definitely succeeded in improving Joffery; it’s just that he should have tried. Seriously, just a little thing such as making sure Joffery’s bodyguard was a man of honor, someone who could be hoped to be a positive influence on the young king; instead of just allowing the Hound the job. The Hound who whose first words in story is basically giving encouragement to the boy’s bad behavior. Seriously, the Hound offers to kill Bran.  Hell, at the very least, Robert could have not disclaimed how he thought cripples should be euthanized in front of the boy. 

 

No one would be able to change Joffrey, the boy was rotten from the beggining, torturing animals, threatinig small folks, even when he tried to take some kind of recongition to robert he tried to murder a 8 years old boy. Fostering Joffrey is pointless and like others said if Robert tried it, he could be the next Jon Arryn.

17 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You know Randyl Tarly like his parenting methods or hate him, he could tell he genuinely wanted to change Sam into a man being up to the task of leading his house. You could tell he wanted to fix Sam for a long time and eventually just gave up hope after trying everything he could think of.

And it didn't work, if anything Sam ended up worse than he begun.

17 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 But failing to improve the boy , the possibility of passing him over for Tommen is reasonable. If Robert thinks a blithering incompetent, like him, is better than Joffery than it’s unreasonable for him to think when Joffery becomes King he is unlikely to do something to launch the country into a civil war. And to be clear I don’t mean just  disinheriting him and leaving it at that; the NW would be happy to have the Crown prince join  their ranks. Basically do a Tarly and force Joffery to take the black. Hell he could have done it by the time of AGOT. The NW took in a ten year old Stark boy  and made that boy Lord commander. I suspect the boy was coerced into joking the brotherhood because he also had relatives who saw his claim to be potentially seen as greater than theirs.

Changing the sucession would lead to chaos, Viserys made every single lord swear to his daughter, but as soon as he died his court refused to follow he will, the realm broke apart and a civil war begun, his daughter had dragons and still couldn't make the lords follow her.

Once Tommen becomes king, any ambition lord would side with Joffrey and use him to gain more influence. Tommen as king would also not change Stannis or Renly, they would still revolt against the Lannisters.

 

17 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 The man is obese, and drinks alcohol daily. He jokes to Ned he fully expects his lifestyle to lead him to an early grave. It’d be unreasonable for him to expect to outlive, his 11 year old(whose in pretty good shape health wise) son and wife.

True, but is the most safe way to pass this mess without causing a civil war. Sometimes acidents happens.

[Varysblackfyre321]

7 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

No one would be able to change Joffrey, the boy was rotten from the beggining, torturing animals, threatinig small folks, even when he tried to take some kind of recongition to robert he tried to murder a 8 years old boy. Fostering Joffrey is pointless and like others said if Robert tried it, he could be the next Jon Arryn.

On 12/21/2018 at 8:52 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

First, I didn’t argue for Robert to foster Joffery. You might as well say Robert forcing the boy to eat a candy everyday in hopes that would make the boy nicer is pointless. Probably true but it isn’t really an appropriate  response to what I said in regards to how Robert could have tried to fix Joffery.  The ways I suggested Robert could have tried to improve the boy were relatively simple and posed no risk. Such as making sure the boy’s bodyguard is an honorable man-not someone who’d encourage Joffery’s negative behavior. Such as bringing the boy to council meetings to learn how government works. Explaining to the boy why his sadistic behavior is wrong. And setting a good example for the boy to follow. Joffery obviously  looked up to Robert. And yes Robert could have failed. I’ve pointed out such repeatedly already. The point is that Robert doing basically nothing to improve Joffery shows he’s just using the boy as an excuse for Robert’s own cowardice. If he truly cared about the welfare of the country after his death, he would have tried fixing the boy. Again he could have failed. He could have very well succeeded-GRRM doesn’t see Joffery’s future to have been set in stone to be awful always. 

GRRM: Yeah. I think Joffrey is a classic 13-year-old bully. Do you know many 13-year-old kids you’d like to give absolute power to? There’s a cruelty in children, especially children of a certain age, that you see in junior high and middle school. We don’t want 13-year-old bullies to be put to death. We probably do when we’re their 13-year-old victims, but they grow up and most of them grow out of it, and sometimes people do regret their actions. But Joffrey will never get that chance, so we don’t know what he would have become. Probably nothing good, but still…

 http://www.ew.com/article/2014/04/13/george-r-r-martin-why-joffrey-killed

7 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

 

 

And it didn't work, if anything Sam ended up worse than he begun.

It didn’t work. Not my point. Again, you could tell through Tarly’s efforts he genuinely cared about the future of his house. Actions speak louder than words. Robert could moan on how much he’s only staying in power because Joffery is terrible but that means nothing unless he’s actively trying to do something to make it so that the person who’d succeed is someone at least  semi-acceptable.

7 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

 

Changing the sucession would lead to chaos, Viserys made every single lord swear to his daughter, but as soon as he died his court refused to follow he will, the realm broke apart and a civil war begun, his daughter had dragons and still couldn't make the lords follow her.

There was plenty of reasons why a lot of lords failed to recognize Rhaenarya as Visery’s heir. Many of the lords who actually swore to Rhaenyra, weren’t lords by the time Visery’s death. Most who did not follow her because of her sex. And Aegon had dragons as well. Robert does not need to worry about passing up Joffery for Tommen to be as controversial as Rhaenarya being labeled by Visery to be his successor. The big thing with Rhaenarya’s was in fact her sex. No one actually argued the line of succession was immutable.Just that Visery’s appointment of a woman as his heir as being invalid And in this instance Joffery would not have his own or at least big enough power base to press his claim. House Lannister would be sated with at least one of their’s being king. Neither boy has built up some sort strong relationship with rest of their relatives. . Still Joffery left alone could pose a threat. Which is I suggested him being forced to take the black. It politically neutralizes him.  

7 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

 

Once Tommen becomes king, any ambition lord would side with Joffrey and use him to gain more influence. Tommen as king would also not change Stannis or Renly, they would still revolt against the Lannisters.

Some ambitious lord might. Not all ambitious lords will side with Joffery. Man likely would see ways to improve their standing through supporting Tommen. I mean in The of the dragons it’s naive to think one side was made up of exclusively people not even partially doing it for their own advancement.  

 

[Arthur Peres]

58 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

First, I didn’t argue for Robert to foster Joffery. You might as well say Robert forcing the boy to eat a candy everyday in hopes that would make the boy nicer is pointless. Probably true but it isn’t really an appropriate  response to what I said in regards to how Robert could have tried to fix Joffery.  The ways I suggested Robert could have tried to improve the boy were relatively simple and posed no risk. Such as making sure the boy’s bodyguard is an honorable man-not someone who’d encourage Joffery’s negative behavior. 

 GRRM: Yeah. I think Joffrey is a classic 13-year-old bully. Do you know many 13-year-old kids you’d like to give absolute power to? There’s a cruelty in children, especially children of a certain age, that you see in junior high and middle school. We don’t want 13-year-old bullies to be put to death. We probably do when we’re their 13-year-old victims, but they grow up and most of them grow out of it, and sometimes people do regret their actions. But Joffrey will never get that chance, so we don’t know what he would have become. Probably nothing good, but still…

Joffrey was not a bully he was a psycho, he tortured animals, he threatned Arya and her friend, he ordered a hit on Bran, he send men beat Sansa and threatned her with rape, he beat up Tommen and killed his pets.

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Such as making sure the boy’s bodyguard is an honorable man-not someone who’d encourage Joffery’s negative behavior. Such as bringing the boy to council meetings to learn how government works. Explaining to the boy why his sadistic behavior is wrong. And setting a good example for the boy to follow. Joffery obviously  looked up to Robert. And yes Robert could have failed. I’ve pointed out such repeatedly already. The point is that Robert doing basically nothing to improve Joffery shows he’s just using the boy as an excuse for Robert’s own cowardice. If he truly cared about the welfare of the country after his death, he would have tried fixing the boy. Again he could have failed. He could have very well succeeded-GRRM doesn’t see Joffery’s future to have been set in stone to be awful always. 

Remember Joffrey in the small concil with Tywin ? he become more and more violent with that. And no Joffrey didn't care about Robert.

“I am sorry for your loss as well, Joffrey,” the dwarf said.

“What loss?”

“Your royal father? A large fierce man with a black beard; you’ll recall him if you try. He was king before you.”

“Oh, him. Yes, it was very sad, a boar killed him.”

Joffrey was also surrounded by the best knights of the realm, he never cared about them, he goes as far as dismissing Selmy when he took the throne. And to be fair, the Hound is not the one to blame for Joffrey behaviour, this falls on Cersei. The Hound is the only to not follow Joffrey's lead about beating up Sansa.

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

There was plenty of reasons why a lot of lords failed to recognize Rhaenarya as Visery’s heir. Many of the lords who actually swore to Rhaenyra, weren’t lords by the time Visery’s death. Most who did not follow her because of her sex. And Aegon had dragons as well. Robert does not need to worry about passing up Joffery for Tommen to be as controversial as Rhaenarya being labeled by Visery to be his successor. The big thing with Rhaenarya’s was in fact her sex. No one actually argued the line of succession was immutable.Just that Visery’s appointment of a woman as his heir as being invalid And in this instance Joffery would not have his own or at least big enough power base to press his claim. House Lannister would be sated with at least one of their’s being king. Neither boy has built up some sort strong relationship with rest of their relatives. . Still Joffery left alone could pose a threat. Which is I suggested him being forced to take the black. It politically neutralizes him.  

Sexism played a huge role on that sure, but not only that. Aegon had the best claim by the law. There are also other instances that some lords backed up a pretender, look at Daemon Blackfyre, all he had was a sword and many ambition lords followed him. Maester Aemon went to the wall to avoid being a problem for Egg. Joffrey has a better claim than Tommen, he is in the eyes of the realm the rightfull king. Robert's Will can  and probably would be ignored like it happened in the cannon.

[FictionIsntReal]

On 12/19/2018 at 10:11 PM, Mordred said:

The land was also peaceful during the reign of Aerys and the economy was thriving.  He left a full treasury.  Robert squandered all of that money and borrowed some more.

Starting a war with most of the Lords Paramount to the point that your own regime is destroyed isn't very peaceful.

[Universal Sword Donor]

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Lol, idk what that means. 

He had the chance, he took it (Aerys). 

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Thats the two dead Starks? As we were saying earlier, whether the Northern Conspiracy was for offense or defense, it was not in Aerys favor (especially with Varys reporting the news). This can be justified as getting rid of (almost) known enemies of the state, similar to Robert/Tywin's dragonspawn or Roberts assassin on Dany.

It is

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Who did Aerys kill that was innocent?(Stark was calling for the death of the heir) I mean really innocent like Joff killing hungry civilians or ordering the death of Mycha.

Rickard, all the fathers, possibly some of Brandon's party. Definitely Glover

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

And to hell with Florent, a Hand surrendering his kingdom to a usurper is the definition of treason. But Sunglass being burnt after Blackwater for not supporting Rhloor or the soldiers who were burnt for eating dead folk is quite excessive.

Not disagreeing the severity, but I am noting the comparable treatment.

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

And Stannis did demand the head of an innocent. He was planning on burning his child nephew and daughters friend Edric.

We can definitely assume that, but we do not know that. This is the core of the debate (intention vs action, specificity vs scope)

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

I dont see how hes less villainous already with all the enslavement and such.

He isn't

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

No, but it makes him responsible for his war. 

It makes him accessory, but not the causus belli. Joff is the coffee between the entree and dessert insofar as the WO5K is concerned.

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Sorry, my post wasnt very clear. I meant that if Jaime never killed Aerys then Aerys would have been the biggest murderer in Westerosi history but since he did that infamous title goes to Walder. 

Oh in that case, I agree. There might be another one we don't know, but Walder is certainly the worst guest right violator. He will go in the annals of the Rat King and others.

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Pycelle let him die, Cersei tells her brothers shes innocent, I belive that. Pycelle was just an idiot, Lysa gave him Tears of Lys, Jon was a goner no matter what. 

Agreed but she "knew" and Pycelle knew:

Pycelle collapsed to his knees. "I beg you . . . I was your lord father's man, and a friend to you in the matter of Lord Arryn. I could not survive the dungeons, not again . . ."

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Nah man, the war of 5 kings wouldnt have happend if it werent for Petyr.

Not then but we know Illyrio and Varys are plotting. It would have happened much the same way

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

To the knowledge of the reader.

We can't agree on good guys and villains, let alone an arch villain

On 12/22/2018 at 3:03 PM, Hugorfonics said:

Or, ya know, the Lannisters that killed him.

Oh for sure they did, but no one thought they were the main threat except maybe Stannis and Ned, too late I'd point out

[Mordred]

On 12/26/2018 at 12:56 AM, FictionIsntReal said:

Starting a war with most of the Lords Paramount to the point that your own regime is destroyed isn't very peaceful.

Jon Arryn started that war.  He should have done as he was commanded and executed Robert and Ned.  Their families were plotting to take down the Targaryen monarchy.  Which make them the villains in my view.

[X-Buster]

I don't know about villains but they made the kingdom worse.  The kingdom would have been better off if Aerys had won the war and beheaded all of the Baratheons, Starks, and Arryns.  Or burn them.  Whichever he preferred.  Jon Arryn's math is messed up.  He started a rebellion that killed many to protect two men.  That should have been a clue as to what kind of leader he would be.  He allowed Robert to bankrupt the country.  Lf was screwing his wife underneath his nose.  Cersei was cuckolding the king under his watch.  That's not an improvement over Aerys.  Aerys burned people.  Duh, so does Stannis.  The Targaryens fought among themselves for power.  Duh, so do the Baratheons.  Look to Renly and Stannis.  Aerys punished some innocents along with the guilty at Duskendale.  Well, Robert sent an assassin after an innocent, young girl.  Whose throne he stole.  Ned protested but in the end was going to let it happen.  They were worse than Aerys.

[Bernie Mac]

26 minutes ago, E.S. Dinah said:

  Jon Arryn's math is messed up.  He started a rebellion that killed many to protect two men.  That should have been a clue as to what kind of leader he would be. 

His math is fine, Aerys had executed his nephew as part of this conspiracy and now wanted him to execute his own two wards. For all he knows he will be next, he's either got to stay united with the Starks and Baratheons or risks being all alone against the Crown.

Self preservation is key.

 

[Moiraine Sedai]

Self-preservation is not a key for a leader.  Arryn should put the greater good ahead of his friends and family.  And if he was part of Robert and Rickard's conspiracy against the Targaryens he is deserving of death.  He should know and accept that they got caught.  It's time to pay for his plotting.

[The Sunland Lord]

Of course they were, but Tywin wasn't. He was a hero.

[Bowen 747]

On 12/20/2018 at 9:01 PM, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Robert's reign is not going to be remembered more fondly than the reign of Aerys.  Robert's reign will be remembered as the time when Westeros went downhill.  House Baratheon will be remembered negatively for their mismanagement of the kingdom.  

The Baratheons will be nothing more than a tiny footnote in history.