Lyanna<3Rhaegar Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 33 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said: In revenge for his sons...who are trained killers and died fighting their enemies. But how is it revenge for his son's when the people he killed had nothing to do with his son's dying? If your sons die & you want revenge you can just go kill a couple of random people & call it justice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Yozza Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said: But how is it revenge for his son's when the people he killed had nothing to do with his son's dying? If your sons die & you want revenge you can just go kill a couple of random people & call it justice? Yeah I agree with you but I just felt like it was ironic that the guy was trying to defend Karstark for killing 'enemy trainees' when by the same definition he had nothing to be angry about to begin with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sidious Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said: But how is it revenge for his son's when the people he killed had nothing to do with his son's dying? If your sons die & you want revenge you can just go kill a couple of random people & call it justice? Isn't that what Tywin sent Gregor Clegane to do? Punish the Tullys by killing their workers and burning their crops and homes. They didn't stop there. They also attacked Walder's people and the Freys had nothing to do with arresting Tyrion. And the Starks. Surely they knew a lot of innocent people will die if they should defy the royal summons. Which they chose to do anyway. The majority of people who suffered and died during the WOTFKS are innocent. The ignorant among them don't even know why they were being attacked by these hairy neanderthals from the north. The WOTFKS killed a lot of random people. We have to blame the Lannisters and the Starks. Westeros would be better off if both of those families had died out at the end of Robert's Rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sidious Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 On 9/8/2019 at 10:00 PM, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said: Stannis most definitely would not have pardoned him. And neither would Stannis pardon Catelyn for essentially the same crime. If Stannis is at all just. Which has not been proven. He too is erratic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sidious Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 On 9/7/2019 at 9:13 PM, Allardyce said: I am in agreement. Robb Stark behaved stupidly. Oh he knew all too well what he was doing. He loved his mother and didn't want to punish her. He didn't care for Karstark and didn't have a strong desire to spare his life. Prejudice. Bias. Compromised judgement. Whatever. Robb was unfit to become king. Thank god he never was. He was a homeless king-want-to-be when he died. He died a homeless rebel leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna<3Rhaegar Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 17 minutes ago, Anti-Stark said: Isn't that what Tywin sent Gregor Clegane to do? Punish the Tullys by killing their workers and burning their crops and homes. They didn't stop there. They also attacked Walder's people and the Freys had nothing to do with arresting Tyrion. And the Starks. Surely they knew a lot of innocent people will die if they should defy the royal summons. Which they chose to do anyway. The majority of people who suffered and died during the WOTFKS are innocent. The ignorant among them don't even know why they were being attacked by these hairy neanderthals from the north. The WOTFKS killed a lot of random people. We have to blame the Lannisters and the Starks. Westeros would be better off if both of those families had died out at the end of Robert's Rebellion. I personally think there is a difference in casualties of war & what Tywin & Karstark did but to each their own. Any which way it goes it's not right. No matter who does it. 16 minutes ago, Anti-Stark said: And neither would Stannis pardon Catelyn for essentially the same crime. If Stannis is at all just. Which has not been proven. He too is erratic. I'm not sure what Stannis would have done. I think it would probably depend on the person he knew his mother to be prior to the treason. I disagree he is too erratic though. He is fair almost to a fault when doling out punishments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 Just now, Anti-Stark said: Oh he knew all too well what he was doing. Indeed. Just now, Anti-Stark said: He loved his mother Absolutely. Bad Robb, how dare you love your mother! Just now, Anti-Stark said: and didn't want to punish her. He probably didn't want to, but did anyway. He told her she'd go to Seaguard and stay there. Just now, Anti-Stark said: He didn't care for Karstark We don't actually learn this from the text, so I'll chalk it up to your biased anti-stark stance. Just now, Anti-Stark said: and didn't have a strong desire to spare his life. Hmmm. Wrong again. Shocking, I know. Just now, Anti-Stark said: Prejudice. Bias. Compromised judgement. Whatever. Robb was unfit to become king. Thank god he never was. He was though. Not acknowledged by the crown, but ask the northerners. Just now, Anti-Stark said: He was a homeless king-want-to-be when he died. He died a homeless rebel leader. Are you talking about Viserys here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sidious Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 Viserys was a true and legit king. No action was needed on his part. Robb, on the other hand, was the heir of Ned Stark at best. He was never a king. He failed in his quest to become king. He failed to separate the north from the kingdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Young Maester Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 9 minutes ago, Anti-Stark said: Viserys was a true and legit king. No action was needed on his part. Robb, on the other hand, was the heir of Ned Stark at best. He was never a king. He failed in his quest to become king. He failed to separate the north from the kingdom. Viserys was a beggar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R2D Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 He killed CHILDREN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aline de Gavrillac Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 On 9/12/2019 at 7:55 PM, The Young Maester said: Viserys was a beggar. It doesn't matter. He was the chosen heir of King Aerys II and crowned by Queen Rhaella. Beggar he might be but without doubt he was a king. 17 minutes ago, R2D said: He killed CHILDREN. So what. The Northmen killed children during their march to the south. Some got killed directly and most indirectly by the disruption they brought. The Tyrells killed Joffrey. Sandor Clegane killed Mycah. Rickard Karstark killed boys who were in training to become soldiers. It's not like they were innocent peasants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R2D Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Aline de Gavrillac said: So what. The Northmen killed children during their march to the south. Some got killed directly and most indirectly by the disruption they brought. The Tyrells killed Joffrey. Sandor Clegane killed Mycah. Rickard Karstark killed boys who were in training to become soldiers. It's not like they were innocent peasants. They were hostages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Young Maester Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 10 hours ago, Aline de Gavrillac said: It doesn't matter. He was the chosen heir of King Aerys II and crowned by Queen Rhaella. Beggar he might be but without doubt he was a king. The King of Beggars than. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna<3Rhaegar Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 11 hours ago, Aline de Gavrillac said: It doesn't matter. He was the chosen heir of King Aerys II and crowned by Queen Rhaella. Beggar he might be but without doubt he was a king But Robb was chosen by his people. So how is Viserys more of a king than Robb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 17 hours ago, Aline de Gavrillac said: It doesn't matter. He was the chosen heir of King Aerys II and crowned by Queen Rhaella. Beggar he might be but without doubt he was a king. If Viserys was a King, even Trystane Truefyre was one, and Renly and Robb def were ones then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 On 9/13/2019 at 1:46 AM, The Anti-Stark said: Viserys was a true and legit king. No action was needed on his part. Robb, on the other hand, was the heir of Ned Stark at best. He was never a king. He failed in his quest to become king. He failed to separate the north from the kingdom. Viserys failed at being King, he was never one, he was the King's son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destiny Arrives Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 Pardoned no killed yea should have held him hostage to kill him later, but such is war. I just figured Robb felt Tywin would have started killing hostages too, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowen 747 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 10 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said: But Robb was chosen by his people. So how is Viserys more of a king than Robb? The difference is rather large. Viserys was chosen by the rightful king of Westeros who had every legal right to do as he did. He was in exile but he was still a king. Robb was chosen by people who had no right to pick their own king because the north is still part of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenin Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Bowen 747 said: The difference is rather large. Viserys was chosen by the rightful king of Westeros who had every legal right to do as he did. He was in exile but he was still a king. Robb was chosen by people who had no right to pick their own king because the north is still part of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. Viserys was chosen bt the deposed King of Westeros and was crowned by a dowager Queen before parting to exile, the North decide to leave the Realm, so there you go, two bs crownings, you can choose to support one, the other, both or reject them all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna<3Rhaegar Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Bowen 747 said: The difference is rather large. Viserys was chosen by the rightful king of Westeros who had every legal right to do as he did. He was in exile but he was still a king. Robb was chosen by people who had no right to pick their own king because the north is still part of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. What @frenin said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.