Jump to content
•Brandon Ice Eyes

The Red Wedding Was Justified.

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

How was Robb justified in backing out of the wedding after the Freys had paid their portion of the agreement? How had the Freys wronged him at that point?

The Freys went overboard in their need for revenge, but their was cause for it due to Robb's actions. Robb had no such justification, he was just a horny teenager.

No. I didn't say Robb was justified. I'm saying if Robb wasn't justified then how in the world can Walder be justified? 

Robb backed out of a betrothal & then tried to make amends for it. 

Walder agreed to said terms, took his end of the bargain & then killed Robb & Co. 

It isn't fair to say Walder is justified because reasons but Robb isn't. He had reasons also. 

Edited by Lyanna<3Rhaegar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

No. I didn't say Robb was justified. I'm saying if Robb wasn't justified then how in the world can Walder be justified? 

You don't understand why Walder was justified in seeking revenge?

  • Walder fulfilled his part of the deal, Robb's forces was allowed through his lands
  • Every battle Robb's forces fought in was with Frey assistance
  • Between 500- 1k Frey men lost their lives on Robb's promise
  • Including his heir Stevron
  • And his grandson who was butchered as a prisoner under Robb's protection

Personally I think Walder should have taken another option, a more pragmatic approach, but he was certainly justified in wanting revenge against a 'king' who had made it clear that he could not be trusted to keep his promise.

Robb proved his promises mean shit, Walder was just offering him a similar promise, one he had no intention of fulfilling.

3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Robb backed out of a betrothal & then tried to make amends for it. 

He backed out after the price was paid in blood.

And as he points out, without the Freys he had no hope. He only tries to make amends because he has no other option.

3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Walder agreed to said terms, took his end of the bargain & then killed Robb & Co. 

Sure. Robb had already proven that his word was meaningless. Walder was paying him back in kind.

3 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

It isn't fair to say Walder is justified because reasons but Robb isn't. He had reasons also. 

It is fair to say that Walder had valid reasons to break his promise to someone who had done the same to him, Robb broke his promise, after receiving payment in blood, because he was horny.

Both had reasons for breaking their promise to the other, Walder's reasons are more justified. Robb's reasons for the loss of Stevron and hundreds if not a thousand Frey lives is less so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bernie Mac

Quote

Again, reread what I actually said. You are jumping to conclusions that was not made in what I wrote.

They are not exactly the same, as I already said, they were both battle strategies. Obviously the Red Wedding was far, far more dishonourable than Robb attacking a sleeping, untrained army of green boys. But some of  Robb's victories were not honourable either.

The objective in war by some is victory even if that means sacrificing honour.

 

I did, and i'm saying the same, not all honorable victories are like the Trident but even then deceptive murder is not a battle strategie, that's why i showd the Black Dinner and Targoviste, one is viewed as political murder and the other as a battle strategy. And tbf the Black Dinner was far more successful than Targoviste, where Vlad III failed in his attempt of slaying the Mehmed II which eventually would lead to his defeat.

 

Quote

Who is HS?

High Septon.

 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

I was very clear in what I said. Tywin, like all successful commanders, cares about unnecessary casualties of war. If there is a option to beat an enemy army without dropping blood from your own men then most commanders will take it, Tywin included. We have seen him do this at least three times in the series

  • Castamere
  • The use of the Mountain Clans in the battle of Green Fork
  • The use of the Freys and Boltons to rid himself of Robb

He's not vainglorious.

You are the one making a claim, I have given you examples disproving it. You need to prove your assertion that "and since when the man cared that much about cassualties in war??"

You made an unsubstantiated claim, prove it.

I don't need to, because that's not what Tywin or what I said, I asked when the mand cared that much about cassualties in war, not specifically about his.

Castamere was a death trap, a fair battle isn't, the Mountains Clans were be lead by Tyrion in a battle were chance were pretty high he might die. 

I'm not arguing that Tywin preferred going untouch, i'm arguing Tywin is suddenly moved by the cassualties his foes might suffer... especially after what he pulled in the Riverlands.

 

 

Quote

Firstly are you under the impression that you are the very first person I have ever spoken to? You are not, most people I communicate with do not speak in absolutes when they don't mean to. Now that is just the average person I communicate with, I understand that your social circle, both online and in real life, may well communicate to each other like that but don't presume your echo chamber is the norm.  Not trying to be rude, just a heads up.

Secondly based on what? Prove it? Come up with actual evidence that the majority of the North would not care about their Lords and the majority of their army being killed in battle?

Have you never studied history? Rarely is the losing side happy with defeat and the death of its people. Scotland, one of the inspirations for the Northern people, were never happy when they were beat by the English in England and vice versa.

Don't they?? Absolutes tend to be used as a general opinion, it's not about echo chamber but ok.

As Jon is saying to Stannis, depend of how they act, the majority of the northmen would see it as another doomed pretender and that's after the Red Wedding, a total defeat would break their spirits, if Robb is capturedor killed, for whom would they fight for?? The Red Wedding however give them a real and cristal clear determinationfor revenge.

 

Quote

Then you clearly don't understand the words you are using.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/strategy

The meaning of strategy is very clear, in your own interpretation of Tywin's actions you have described a strategy to rid himself of the Northern threat. That is a strategic move.

And a political assasination achieves the same, which is what the Red Wedding is, it still isn't a battle strategy, just as like Kevan being murdered by Varys, doesn't make the eunuch a battle strategy, even when he said that with Kevan alive, YG may not get the Throne.

 

 

Quote

1) Robb did not trust the Freys, he makes this clear. He trusted his army "Robb looked more amused than afraid. "I have an army to protect me, Mother, I don't need to trust in bread and salt."

Now just because Robb was betrayed by his own Northern army does not mean Lords are going to stop using their own vassals when they go to war

2) I imagine that Lords who have fucked over the Freys are not going to trust their 'word' at the Twins. But their allies are not going to have the same problem.

He never said he didn't trust in the Freys, otherwise he wouldn't have entered in the Twins, he just thought he didn't have anything to be afraid of.

I don't know where the other thing comes from.

Are you sure?? I don't see Jaime or Cersei very trusting either, how many nobles and smallfolk trust in the Frey's word??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it boils down to is the seriousness of breaking one's word and killing people.  A farmer promising to take his wife out for a dinner in Oldtown and then breaking that promise to go drinking with the boys is minor stuff.  A leader who promised to marry the daughter of a future ally in exchange for military support and safe passage made a very serious oath.  Both men might break their word but it's not the same.  Walder put his family at risk because he had no choice.  The Starks forced him to pick a side.  He being smart tried to make the best of the situation and got a nice deal for his family.  He promised to pay his part by letting the north pass through his lands and giving them military support.  This is not minor stuff because it meant rebellion against the monarch.  Walder Frey not only let the north pass.  He gave them his own men to use.  He lost his son and his men.  But no one can say Walder was stingy nor did he hold out on Robb.  He was generous and went above and beyond.  Robb's part was easy.  He just had to marry one of Walder's daughters, marry Arya to a Frey, and foster two little boys.  The Starks broke their word.  I find it hard to believe why a lot of people here can't understand why the Freys would be furious.  

The Starks only decided to apologize and make amends because they had to.  They calculated they don't stand a chance of winning without the Freys.  You know what else, Brandon Ice Eyes?  The Starks went to the twin castles expecting treachery.  They didn't trust Walder Frey but they went anyway because they had to.  It's not like the Freys lured them to the twin castles and betrayed their trust.  The Starks didn't got because they trusted the Freys.  They went because they had to.  They were dead people without Frey help.  They were desperate because the iron born took their castle and they were going to lose.  Robb and Cat doesn't respect Walder but they agreed to his terms because they were desperate.  

The only person who knows if this act is justified is Mr. Martin.  This is because we don't know what Tywin Lannister said to threaten Walder Frey.  I can't blame the Freys for wanting to avoid the losing side.  They own a much coveted property and what if the Lannisters decided to take that away as punishment for rebelling.  We know the Lannisters are capable of it.  Tywin was King Aerys Targaryen's goon when he ordered the massacre of the Darklyns.  Tywin massacred his own bannermen before Duskendale happened.  The Freys were right to fear the Lannisters.  Walder Frey doesn't want his daughters to end up in Gregor's bedroom and that is something like Tywin would do.  Only the author knows what the consequences were for the Freys.  We don't know the punishment Tywin and Joffrey planned for the rebels.  But the biggest unknown is what was going on through Walder's head.  Revenge is not a good enough motive to murder your house guest.  I repeat, revenge is not a good enough reason to murder your house guest.  Any sin can be forgiven under the right circumstances.  I use the same reasoning to come to the conclusion why Arya is not justified in killing those people in Braavos.  Forgiveness might be asking too much of Arya but looking the other way and getting on with her life is not a bad option to take.   Walder Frey was not justified to murder those people under his roof if the reason is revenge.  Forget the guest rights.  Let us get down to the brass tacks and call this murder.  The promise of a big reward is not a good enough reason to murder people.   Personal gain is not a good enough reason to murder.  But I still can't answer your question because we don't know what was going through Walder's reasoning and what he was threatened with.  Walder might be justified if the Lannisters threatened to take away his toll bridge and bring him to financial ruin.  The proper question to ponder then becomes, do you let your family's future be destroyed for the sake of the Starks who have clearly shown their complete lack of respect for you and have broken their oaths to you.  Isn't that asking too much.  The Freys love their property as much as the Starks love Winterfell.  Many of his children will die if this war continued.  To continue this war meant many more people will get murdered on both sides.  Walder can end part of the war if he beat the Starks.  Is it justified or not.  My answer will have to be only George Martin knows.

*Mr. Martin is known for having a strong stance against violence.  Maybe he might say it's better to go down in flames and let your family be ruined for the sake of a man who disrespects you.  But the beauty of the story is the complexity and the unknown so that each reader can draw their own conclusions.  If they want to. 

Support the Starks and aid the rebellion meant the murders will continue for longer.  Only the location is different.  Thousands on the battlefield or a few at the dinner table.  Murder will happen either way Walder decided.  It's just the way those murders would happen.  If doing it this way saved more lives than it costed.  Would that make it justified?  Martin might think so.  People have already rightly said it is better for soldiers to die than the civilians.  

 

Edited by Fast4Wendy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bowen 747 said:

The question is not whether the Starks deserved to get beaten like that.  It's whether other lords in the same position as Walder would have done the same thing under the same circumstances.  I think they would have.  The Starks had to be removed from power and I agree with a previous commenter's assessment.  Walder cannot do this directly.  The Freys could not fight the Starks directly and hope to win.  Some kind of deception had to take place.  

Freys went through the red wedding because they were betrayed and felt a lot of anger towards Robb. I somehow dont see any other house committing to a red wedding. Breaking guest right and murdering a lord on your own halls, will harm a houses honour and reputation in Westeros. Freys went through the red wedding because they were already disliked by many lords in westeros. Walder probably said why not, they already dislike us anyways. Any other Lord with Walder and Roose's numbers would've betrayed Robb when he was making his march north by attacking him on the rear and front when he was least expecting it. Walder had more than enough numbers together with bolton to take out Robb, and fight him directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:
  • Walder fulfilled his part of the deal, Robb's forces was allowed through his lands
  • Every battle Robb's forces fought in was with Frey assistance
  • Between 500- 1k Frey men lost their lives on Robb's promise
  • Including his heir Stevron
  • And his grandson who was butchered as a prisoner under Robb's protection

Walders men losing their lives in a battle they willingly joined does not give justificaction for the RW. No matter how you twist it. 

11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Personally I think Walder should have taken another option, a more pragmatic approach, but he was certainly justified in wanting revenge against a 'king' who had made it clear that he could not be trusted to keep his promise.

Robb proved his promises mean shit, Walder was just offering him a similar promise, one he had no intention of fulfilling.

Nope. Revenge is never 'justified'. Wanting revenge is understandable but not justified, not legally, not morally. 

11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He backed out after the price was paid in blood.

And as he points out, without the Freys he had no hope. He only tries to make amends because he has no other option.

I disagree this is the only reason he tries to make amends but what difference does it make if it is? He still tried to make amends. 

 

11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

is fair to say that Walder had valid reasons to break his promise to someone who had done the same to him, Robb broke his promise, after receiving payment in blood, because he was horny.

Both had reasons for breaking their promise to the other, Walder's reasons are more justified. Robb's reasons for the loss of Stevron and hundreds if not a thousand Frey lives is less so

It's hard to have a conversation with you when you continuously say the same erroneous things. Robb didn't break his promise because he was horny. That's absolutely ridiculous. He could have fulfilled whatever lust he had over & over again without breaking any promises. He never promised not to sleep with anyone. 

Walders threw a fit because of a broken marriage proposal. The loss of anyone during the battle takes no part in this. Robb's reasons are much more justified. 

Walders doesn't get a free-for-all pass because someone broke a promise to him. If you lie to me & then I kill you am I justified? Because you slighted me first. That's the logic you are using here. There are acceptable & justified ways Walder could have received justice or even paid Robb back in kind - the RW wasn't one of them by any stretch of the imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bowen 747 said:

Very well.  The answer is not simple.  It brought more benefit than harm.  The Starks were defeated with minimal loses for the Frey side.  A lord has the burden of responsibility to make sure he loses as few of his people as possible during war.  Lord Walder proved himself a better leader for his people than Robb was to the north.  Walder was looking out for his people, which is what a lord should be doing.  Robb put his people in danger because he loved the girl he slept with.  There is little doubt here who served the best interest of the  people he led.  

The Freys broke guest rights.  No ifs or buts about that.  They broke a long tradition.  But many of the other families would have done the same thing if they were in Walder's shoes.  Robb was leading his people badly and he just lost the north.  He broke his oath to Walder Frey.  Now this is odd because Walder, the man who supposedly doesn't pay his obligations, carried out everything he agreed to do.  And he lost his heir to help the Starks.  So it doesn't matter what the Robb apologists say in their attempts to downplay Robb's oath breaking.  The circumstances made it a very egregious offense to the Freys.  It was a grave insult to Walder and the gods.  

The question is not whether the Starks deserved to get beaten like that.  It's whether other lords in the same position as Walder would have done the same thing under the same circumstances.  I think they would have.  The Starks had to be removed from power and I agree with a previous commenter's assessment.  Walder cannot do this directly.  The Freys could not fight the Starks directly and hope to win.  Some kind of deception had to take place.  The only non-military people to die were/was Aegon Frey.  Catelyn was a member of Robb's command team.  She was a leader of the rebels.  I would place her in the same category as one of Robb's military advisers.  The r/w contained the damage and kept hundreds of thousands of innocent peasants from having to die.  The r/w was a slaughter but if you think about it you might see that it doesn't matter how it was done.  Killing is killing.  The end results are the same.  The Starks and their supporters are dead.  They are soldiers who also killed people in the opposition.  Walder, if he had had a larger military, could have fought the Starks directly and if he had won and killed thousands.  That would not be different.  Except many on his side would have died too.  Many innocent peasants would have died.  

The answer isn't simple.  The r/w saved your life if you are a Frey soldier.  This was better than meeting Robb out on the battlefield.  Your lord made sure to keep you safe while he dealt with his enemy.  It is justified from where you are coming from.  

Cersei has said that she would let the Freys fall as soon  as Walder dies, Walder hasn't done any favor to his family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robb Stark acted selfishly.  I know the Stark fans tried to paint his actions a different color like it was done out of honor.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  Robb simply did not want to marry a Frey.  He broke his pact in order to avoid having to get stuck with a wife he didn't choose.  A lot of people are sacrificing to answer the Stark call to arms but the Starks refused to make sacrifices.  Catelyn put them all in a bad spot because she was not willing to sacrifice her daughters.  How can a leader expect their subordinates to sacrifice when they are not.  The Starks suck at leadership.  I'm specifically talking about Robb, Catelyn, and Jon.  Robb had zero justification to break his oath to the Freys.  Zero.

frenin

It doesn't matter what Cersei is thinking.  She has bigger problems to think about.  She's in deeper than Walder right now.  And Tywin Lannister is dead.  Hoster Tully is dead.  Walder Frey's boy has River Run.  He got the best out of this deal.  

The Starks only attempted to make amends because they need the Freys.  Robb didn't apologize out of shame and decency.  

Edited by Allardyce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, frenin said:

Cersei has said that she would let the Freys fall as soon  as Walder dies, Walder hasn't done any favor to his family.

First of all if you are citing Cersei then you must be desperate. Cersei, AFFC onwards, is constantly making bad decisions that puts herself in a worse situation whether it is ignoring Kevan's advice, antagonizing the Iron Bank or arming the Faith. Every time she thinks of a short term solution it creates a long term problem. Pissing off the Freys, holders of the Twins, Darry and Riverrun as of AFFC, is a ridiculous idea.

 

Secondly I'm pretty sure she does not say what you think she says.

"Lord Walder will never sacrifice his own," said Pycelle.
"No," mused Cersei, "but his heirs may be less squeamish. Lord Walder will soon do us the courtesy of dying, we can hope. What better way for the new Lord of the Crossing to rid himself of inconvenient half brothers, disagreeable cousins, and scheming sisters than by naming them the culprits?"
 
Unless I'm mistaken at no point does she say she is willing to let House Frey fall. Where in the books is that claimed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Walders men losing their lives in a battle they willingly joined does not give justificaction for the RW. No matter how you twist it. 

They didn't willingly join, they joined for a price, a price that Robb refused to pay.

How exactly am I twisting that?

If you ae trying to sell your House, someone agrees to buy it, trashes the House before they pay for it and then back out of the deal are you not going to be angry and want justice?

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Nope. Revenge is never 'justified'. Wanting revenge is understandable but not justified, not legally, not morally. 

Who was claiming it was either moral or legal? You are moving the goalposts here.

Justified merely means you have a good reason for something, at least here in the UK it does. Walder had a good reason for wanting his revenge.

As for moral that is up to the individual to decide his moral compass, and legally it is a sore spot considering as rebels Robb was not protected by the laws of Westeros.

Theologically it was wrong, if the gods exist in Westeros and they actually care about 'guest rights' then Walder and his kin will pay for their sins in the next life.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I disagree this is the only reason he tries to make amends but what difference does it make if it is? He still tried to make amends. 

Because he has to, because he has no other option. It is too late to make amends.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

It's hard to have a conversation with you when you continuously say the same erroneous things.

If you think I am incorrect about something please quote from the books to disprove what I said.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

 

Robb didn't break his promise because he was horny.

Sure he did. He fancied Jeyne and, by medieval law, raped her and then married her. He was horny.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

That's absolutely ridiculous.

How is a 16 year old being horny ridiculous? Have you never met a 16 year old boy?

Teenagers make idiotic decisions all the time, Robb is no different.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

He could have fulfilled whatever lust he had over & over again without breaking any promises. He never promised not to sleep with anyone. 

He was horny, attracted to Jeyne and sickened at the idea of having to marry a weasel looking Frey. He allowed his cock to guide him when he was feeling down about Winterfall and the Battle of Blackwater.

Men make weak decisions, this was a weak decision on Robb's part.

And literally no one cares about Robb sleeping with other people. They care about him breaking his promise that hundreds of Frey men had lost their lives for. All he had to do was marry a Frey, instead he got horny and slept with a female prisoner.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Walders threw a fit because of a broken marriage proposal.

When did he throw this fit? Can you quote it?

"the King in the North arises. Seems we killed some of your men, Your Grace. Oh, but I'll make you an apology, that will mend them all again, heh."    

Seems he's pretty pissed at Robb thinking all will be forgiven over an apology.

I get it, a lot of fans of the series want to dehumanize the Freys, much like the Jews were in the medieval times (both were called rats/weasels and looked down upon for being good with money) but it is not just the Starks and who are capable of being angry over their family members being killed.

 

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

The loss of anyone during the battle takes no part in this.

Can you prove this?

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

Robb's reasons are much more justified. 

Him thinking with his dick was more justified than Walder losing the son he had been grooming for 60 years

His father was querulous and stubborn, with an iron will and a wasp's tongue, but he did believe in taking care of his own. All of his own, even the ones who had displeased and disappointed him. Even the ones whose names he can't remember. Once he was gone, though . . .
When Ser Stevron had been heir, that was one thing. The old man had been grooming Stevron for sixty years, and had pounded it into his head that blood was blood.
 
 

 

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Walders doesn't get a free-for-all pass because someone broke a promise to him.

Who said he should? He, like Robb, will most likely suffer retribution for what he had done. Deservedly so in my opinion.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

If you lie to me & then I kill you am I justified?

No, but if I am responsible for the death of your son, grandson and possibly as many as a thousand of your men then yes you are justified in murdering me.

The problem here is you want to ignore all the human life lost their life on Robb's promise.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

Because you slighted me first. That's the logic you are using here.

No, I have been very clear with the logic I am using. By all means disagree with my opinion, but don't make up an argument I never made.

My argument is clear and it is not the argument you are presenting.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

There are acceptable & justified ways Walder could have received justice or even paid Robb back in kind - the RW wasn't one of them by any stretch of the imagination.

Are there? Name them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Allardyce said:

Robb simply did not want to marry a Frey.  He broke his pact in order to avoid having to get stuck with a wife he didn't choose. 

Show me where in text any of this is cited as the reason Robb didn't marry a Frey. 

 

10 hours ago, Allardyce said:

Catelyn put them all in a bad spot because she was not willing to sacrifice her daughters

No. Cat releasing Jaime did nothing to justify the RW. 

 

10 hours ago, Allardyce said:

Robb had zero justification to break his oath to the Freys.  Zero

The argument is whether or not the RW was justified. No one seems to think Robb was justified in breaking his promise to marry. Oddly enough those same people think Walder completely justified in slaughtering them all. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

First of all if you are citing Cersei then you must be desperate. Cersei, AFFC onwards, is constantly making bad decisions that puts herself in a worse situation whether it is ignoring Kevan's advice, antagonizing the Iron Bank or arming the Faith. Every time she thinks of a short term solution it creates a long term problem. Pissing off the Freys, holders of the Twins, Darry and Riverrun as of AFFC, is a ridiculous 

First of all you are very condescending. Citing Cersei doesn't make anyone desperate. The poster is showing that even the house that supported the RW knows the Frey's will likely suffer mass consequences for it. He/she didn't say anything about it being a good idea to piss off Frey's etc. So maybe you ought to read like you have stated to this poster a couple times.

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

They didn't willingly join, they joined for a price, a price that Robb refused to pay.

That is willingly joining them no? 

 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

you ae trying to sell your House, someone agrees to buy it, trashes the House before they pay for it and then back out of the deal are you not going to be angry and want justice?

Not remotely what I was arguing. In your scenario the buyer willingly bought the house. Period. I didn't say anything about not wanting justice because the house was trashed or whatever. Even if the house was trashed the issue the buyer has is that the property was not as bought, not that they were forced into buying it. 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Who was claiming it was either moral or legal? You are moving the goalposts here.

No I haven't moved any goal posts. If it's not justified legally or morally how exactly is it justified? To have some valid justification it has to be based on something to be discussed or argued. It wasn't justified in the eyes of the people of Westeros or in the eyes of the Gods in aSoIaF. So is your argument that it was justified in your eyes? & In Walders eyes? If so I suppose the argument is over because I cannot cite any text that would argue it isn't justified in your eyes. 

 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Because he has to, because he has no other option. It is too late to make amends

According to who? 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

you think I am incorrect about something please quote from the books to disprove what I said

You made the claim, you quote it. Show me what text suggests Robb was a horny 16 year old let alone that is why he broke his promise. 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He was horny, attracted to Jeyne and sickened at the idea of having to marry a weasel looking Frey. He allowed his cock to guide him when he was feeling down about Winterfall and the Battle of Blackwater

I think Robb might say he did this in a moment of weakness but barring that prove it. Show text proving he was A. horny B. Sickened at the idea of having to marry a weasel face Frey C. He let his cock guide him D. This is why he broke his betrothal.

 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

And literally no one cares about Robb sleeping with other people. They care about him breaking his promise that hundreds of Frey men had lost their lives for. All he had to do was marry a Frey, instead he got horny and slept with a female prisoner

You are contradicting yourself here. If no one cares who Robb sleeps with what possible bearing could Robb being horny & sleeping with someone have on the RW?? 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

When did he throw this fit? Can you quote it?

Yeah the RW was one big fit in response to Robb not marrying one of his kin. 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

get it, a lot of fans of the series want to dehumanize the Freys, much like the Jews were in the medieval times (both were called rats/weasels and looked down upon for being good with money) but it is not just the Starks and who are capable of being angry over their family members being killed

You are the only one I've seen likening the Frey's to Jews. I haven't dehumanized them at all. Nor have I said once Walder wasn't right to be angry. 

 

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Can you prove this

Well it was your claim that they do so really you should prove it but not one Frey lost their life because Robb married Jeyne. If part of Walders wrath is due to losing people on the battle field it's just further proof of his ridiculousness. If he sent his men into battle believing none would be killed & that if they were he could hold Robb responsible & seek out revenge for it then I'm hard pressed to see how anyone thinks Walder is very smart. 

 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

fancied Jeyne and, by medieval law, raped her and then married her. He was horny

I think you would have a hard time proving rape in a court but ok. His being horny would have been fulfilled by the rape or sex alone no? So it hardly explains the marriage. The thing that ACTUALLY broke the contract with Walder. People don't get married because they are horny. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

said he should? He, like Robb, will most likely suffer retribution for what he had done. Deservedly so in my opinion.

If he will suffer deserved retribution then how we're his acts justified? 

You are using Robb breaking a marriage contract as a justification for the RW which implies to me, in your opinion, after Walder was slighted any consequences he wanted to give were justified. My argument is the slight & the consequences, in my opinion, should be somewhat on the same level. Breaking a marriage contract does not equal slaughtering people at a wedding. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Him thinking with his dick was more justified than Walder losing the son he had been grooming for 60 years

Again there is no textual basis for Robb thinking with his dick equalling Robb breaking his betrothal. Furthermore if Walder was extremely worried about losing his son that he had groomed for 60 years to the point that he was willing to slaughter unarmed people if he died in battle he probably should not have sent him into battle. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

but if I am responsible for the death of your son, grandson and possibly as many as a thousand of your men then yes you are justified in murdering 

So every battle Commander is directly responsible for the lives lost under him & can & should be punished when said people die? If this were the case there would be no one left to lead a battle. Walder knowingly & willingly sent these men into battle knowing very well the risk. He cannot, with good reason, get pissed when he lost men. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

The problem here is you want to ignore all the human life lost their life on Robb's promise

No, the problem here is that you want to equate Walder losing men to the RW. Is your assertion that Walder carried out the RW because he lost men in Robb's battles? In my opinion that is an even worse justification for the RW than the broken betrothal. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, I have been very clear with the logic I am using. By all means disagree with my opinion, but don't make up an argument I never made.

My argument is clear and it is not the argument you are presenting.

Maybe I've misunderstood your argument or maybe you don't present your argument nearly as clear as you think. It seems I'm not the only one you've accused of misrepresenting your argument so I'm inclined to go with the latter considering you are the common denominator in that sense. 

Either way it says nothing to my ability to understand the argument, it is merely a miscommunication on one of our parts. 

This is why I came to the conclusion I did. You are arguing that Walders backing out on the second agreed upon marriage & slaughtering unarmed men was justified because he only backed out after Robb broke the betrothal & the price was "paid in blood" So I took this to mean because Robb slighted Walder first Walder was justified in his reactions. 

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Are there? Name them

Walder could have removed his self from Robb's army - he would have been completely justified in doing so. This would have hurt Robb's cause much more than Robb not marrying a Frey hurt Walder. He could have even accepted the 2nd marriage proposal & backed out after because this is essentially what Robb did, albeit Walder would be doing it solely for revenge & Robb's reasons were less malicious than that. That would have left Walder with the option to be loyal to the crown again if he so wished, wait out the battles & see who was coming out on top as he is known to do, AND had one of his kin married to a lord like he was promised in the beginning. He wouldn't have the stain of breaking guest right on his family & would have a better time marrying off some of the rest of his kin. As it stands, who in their right mind would agree to a wedding at the Twins again? They would be concerned any previously perceived or real slight against Walder will end in a massacre if they agree to marry. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

First of all if you are citing Cersei then you must be desperate. Cersei, AFFC onwards, is constantly making bad decisions that puts herself in a worse situation whether it is ignoring Kevan's advice, antagonizing the Iron Bank or arming the Faith. Every time she thinks of a short term solution it creates a long term problem. Pissing off the Freys, holders of the Twins, Darry and Riverrun as of AFFC, is a ridiculous idea.

 

Secondly I'm pretty sure she does not say what you think she says.

"Lord Walder will never sacrifice his own," said Pycelle.
"No," mused Cersei, "but his heirs may be less squeamish. Lord Walder will soon do us the courtesy of dying, we can hope. What better way for the new Lord of the Crossing to rid himself of inconvenient half brothers, disagreeable cousins, and scheming sisters than by naming them the culprits?"
 
Unless I'm mistaken at no point does she say she is willing to let House Frey fall. Where in the books is that claimed?

No, I'm not, Cersei is just the general outcry that is let's see how we can blame the Frey for all and that House Lannister and the Crown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2019 at 12:30 AM, Bernie Mac said:

Tywin didn't kill anyone. Frey and Northmen did all the killing.

And while it was more than a few people, it was not that much more. Many of the guests in the castle were taken hostage, some killed but we are talking a maximum of hundreds.

The soldiers outside, not protected by Guest Rights, are another matter.

I didn't say Tywin killed anyone. In fact, I said he didn't kill a few ppl. And I would say that at a wedding, one is one too many.

The soldiers were celebrating a wedding with allies.

On 9/6/2019 at 12:30 AM, Bernie Mac said:

Yes. Correct. The only people who can respect or condone this strategy are the people who respect or condone this strategy.

Brilliant insight!

....I'm trying to be polite and insinuate that certain individuals may condone Tywin's plan, but the mass readership has never been able to. I wouldn't want to cast aspersions. There are a few reasons why someone would admire the RW. Some people are contrarians who cannot bring themselves to agree with a majority. And as mentioned further up-stream, some people come here to post their thinly veiled hatred of the Starks. In a world of Anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers, one can never be too sure who they're talking to. I left it ambiguous. 

 

On 9/6/2019 at 12:30 AM, Bernie Mac said:

Sure. They also respect victory.

Sure. But not at any cost. Some would resort to killing children. Some wouldn't. And this is the crux of the argument. Not the what, but the how. The methods used by Walder Frey were cowardly and pathetic. Not just in the eyes of us readers, but in the eyes of in-book characters who are products of their society. 

 

On 9/6/2019 at 12:30 AM, Bernie Mac said:

Unless they are sleeping? Like Robb often did, attack sleeping enemies. The green lads at Oxcross were reportedly untrained and unarmed when Robb slaughtered them. It's war, victory is more important than honour.

If you're at war. And there is an enemy out there looking for you, and they catch you asleep. You will wake with a blade in your belly if at all. Armies are known to do this. It's not difficult to differentiate this from a wedding feast. Where men are suppose to let their guard down. They were celebrating with allies

"Victory is more important than honour"... I don't know how you can be so blind. The RW worked in the short-run. But do you truly believe that it is over? Can you truly call it a victory? It merely spun the wheel once more. Twofk rages on, Stannis still lives. The North is still in a rebellion. The Freys are losing kin left right and centre. A contingent of their army has been ordered to march out into the Wolfswood to fight an enemy hellbent on their destruction at the behest of a man who's renown for sending other peoples men to their deaths to preserve himself. Against an enemy who can walk atop the very snow that the Freys have to wade through. The Boltons will treat the Freys no better than the Starks did. If anything, Walder can expect nothing but misery from his Bolton alliance. And the Lannisters are screwed. Walder Frey's alliance is about to unravel because there is no loyalty. And that bit of bloody vengeance he took out on the kitn will haunt his family for a very long time. The Starks, and their 'honour' is made into a sort of joke. But winter will change that. Loyalty will be the difference between life and death. 

On 9/6/2019 at 12:30 AM, Bernie Mac said:

The clever thing was eradicating the majority of the Northern force, by having them kill each other. There was 7,000 Northern soldiers at the Twins. 3,500 on each side of the 'battle'.

It wasn't clever though. It was cowardly. If we had a dispute. And I invited you to my home to discuss and make terms. And then, after offering you a sandwich, I came up behind you with a bread-knife, would you truly think I had 'outsmarted' you? Would anyone? 

If there was any merit to what you were saying, then why do the Frey's lie about it? In the Merman's court, the three Freys, Jared, Symond and Rhaegar attest that Rob and his men turned into wolves. That Rob and his men had the mark of the beast upon them. They also said that Rob killed Wendel Manderly.... It's not even a clever lie.

The clever thing to do would of been to just shut their gates. Tell Rob that he had broken their alliance. Let the Northmen be either smashed by The Mountain or spend their days attempting to retake their home and then try to deal with winter, wildlings and eventually the others. The problem would of solved itself. Especially considering that the North will be dependent on the south for food during winter. Needless to say, the North wouldn't be getting any relief.


Or simply arrest Rob the second he stepped foot into the Twins. It was for the IT to decide the fate of the rebel, not Walder nor Roose. And this is why I think Tywin is the really clever one, here. He played them all against each other knowing that Walder would be salivating at the prospect of revenge and more marriages. Tywin could shunt all of the North's anger and outrage onto the Frey's. But Walder, being the vengeful and ambitious man he is played his part. And won his family enmity. I'm willing to predict that in time, people will forget about the feud between Lannister and Stark. But the RW won't be forgotten. People will make songs of it. 

Quote

Barbrey: Lord Wyman is not the only one who lost kin at your Red Wedding, Frey. Do you imagine Whoresbane loves you any better? If you did not hold the Greatjon, he would pull out your entrails and make you eat them, as Lady Hornwood ate her fingers. Flints, Cerwyns, Tallharts, Slates ... they all had men with the Young Wolf.
Roger: House Ryswell too.
Barbrey: Even Dustins out of Barrowton. The north remembers, Frey.

—Barbrey and Roger Ryswell to Aenys Frey

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheThreeEyedCow said:

I didn't say Tywin killed anyone. In fact, I said he didn't kill a few ppl.

Excellent, we are on the same page. Tywin did not kill anyone at the Red Wedding. Glad you agree.

Quote

The soldiers were celebrating a wedding with allies.

And they were still soldiers. On their way to fight another war.

Just like the soldiers at Oxcross who were sleeping it is their commanders fault that they were not more alert.

Quote

....I'm trying to be polite and insinuate that certain individuals may condone Tywin's plan, but the mass readership has never been able to.

At no point have I or anyone else claimed otherwise. What is with the constant need to move the goalposts? Can none of you accept a claim was wrong rather than just change the entire argument?

It is a fantasy series, obviously the majority of people are going to side with the primary characters and be biased towards them. That is how fiction is often set up.

 

Quote

 

I wouldn't want to cast aspersions. There are a few reasons why someone would admire the RW. Some people are contrarians who cannot bring themselves to agree with a majority.

lol the condescension. Get over yourself.

Are you so arrogant that the only reason you can conclude that people disagree with you on a subject is that they are a contrarian?

People have different opinions, especially when it comes to an event in a work of fiction.

 

Quote

 

And as mentioned further up-stream, some people come here to post their thinly veiled hatred of the Starks. In a world of Anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers, one can never be too sure who they're talking to. I left it ambiguous. 

You are replying to me, not some nameless bogeyman.

From the Stark side I think Cat is one of the greatest characters in the series, Sansa and Arya's are both heroic and Ned's chapters were pure medieval noir, one of my favourite genres in literature. Robb had the potential to be one of the greatest leaders in Westeros, but he was also a teenager who made mistakes down to his inexperience.

Not everyone loves the Starks, that is not a crime, but by the same token not everyone who makes a point about the Starks that you deem to be negative does so because they hate the characters. Many people are not as invested in these fictional characters as you are, some of us can see characters who have both negative and positive traits.

It is bad enough that civilized debate about politics is impossible online without someone ignoring your entire reply only to invalidate it because you are a Dem/Republican but for that to happening about literature is just ridiculous. People like yourself who are desperate to shut down discussion by labelling anyone whose opinion you don't like as a hater is a cancer to nuanced debate online. Well done on that!

Quote

 

Sure. But not at any cost. Some would resort to killing children. Some wouldn't.

Like Robb. Robb had no problem with killing the Children in the Twins in AGOT.

"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!"

It is a medieval world, many would resort to children casualties if it meant getting their way.

Quote

 

And this is the crux of the argument. Not the what, but the how. The methods used by Walder Frey were cowardly and pathetic. Not just in the eyes of us readers, but in the eyes of in-book characters who are products of their society. 

Cowardly and pathetic you say? By all means quote 5 characters who use call it that.

It was hugely dishonourable, no one in the books calls it cowardly or pathetic. You are making up your own head cannon.

Quote

 

If you're at war. And there is an enemy out there looking for you, and they catch you asleep. You will wake with a blade in your belly if at all. Armies are known to do this. It's not difficult to differentiate this from a wedding feast. Where men are suppose to let their guard down. They were celebrating with allies

The soldiers were not invited to the wedding, Robb was going home and taking his army with him. They were outside the castle and were not provided food.

They were at war and had constantly caught enemy armies by surprise, they should have known better.

Quote

 

It wasn't clever though.

It was the intelligent option. It removed Robb and his generals from the board.

Military it was a clever move, a dishonourable move, but an intelligent one no matter what.

Quote

 

It was cowardly.

Cowardly would be doing nothing. Allowing Robb who had fucked the Freys over to get away with it.

Quote

 

If we had a dispute. And I invited you to my home to discuss and make terms. And then, after offering you a sandwich, I came up behind you with a bread-knife, would you truly think I had 'outsmarted' you? Would anyone? 

That was not Walder, or Tywin. That was a Northman.

And who claimed anything about outsmarting? Can you please actually reply to what I have said rather than write paragraph after  paragraph of points you imagine I have made. This need to strawman and argue in bad faith is quite telling at this point.

Quote

If there was any merit to what you were saying, then why do the Frey's lie about it?

What am I saying? What do you think I have said?

You are making up points that I have never said.

Quote

 

The clever thing to do would of been to just shut their gates.

That would have been pragmatic, but Walder would not have got his revenge for the thousand or so Frey men who had lost their lives over Robb's broken promise.

But reread what I wrote, at no point did I claim Walder was clever in what he did. You have imagined an argument never made.

Here is the breakdown of the conversations

  • YOU: The one clever bit of the RW was the way that Tywin managed to shift the entire focus of Northern hostility away from House Lannister and squarely onto The Freys. 
  • ME: The clever thing was eradicating the majority of the Northern force, by having them kill each other. There was 7,000 Northern soldiers at the Twins. 3,500 on each side of the 'battle'

Why are you bringing Walder into this when your original point was about Tywin, I quoted that and replied about Tywin.

Either you are disingenuous and are deliberately misrepresenting what I have said or you have issues with reading comprehension. Which is it?

 

Edited by Bernie Mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, frenin said:

No, I'm not, Cersei is just the general outcry that is let's see how we can blame the Frey for all and that House Lannister and the Crown.

You wrongly claimed that Cersei would let House Frey fall as soon as Walder was dead. You were wrong and I quoted the books to show that you were mistaken.

Is it that hard to admit that you may have been mistaken about something written in a huge volume of work or are you just going to double down on what you wrote rather than admit that you may have been mistaken?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Show me where in text any of this is cited as the reason Robb didn't marry a Frey. 

Robb was in lust, he fancied his prisoner Jeyne and by the standards of the day raped his prisoner.

 

Quote

 

No. Cat releasing Jaime did nothing to justify the RW. 

That is correct. The Red Wedding would have happened regardless of Jaimes' release.

Quote

 

The argument is whether or not the RW was justified.

And from Walder's perspective it was.

Quote

 

No one seems to think Robb was justified in breaking his promise to marry.

Some do. I have read many people on this forum who wish Robb married Margaery or some other noble with a bigger army than the Freys after he made that promise.

I've seen some argue that Robb was justified in breaking his promise because he had few other options.

Like I said to Frenin, it is a bad idea to use absolutes on topics like this where there are a multitude of opinions. This is one of the most discussed topics in the fandom, with hundreds of indepth discussions on this very forum. There is not some clear answer, If there was it would not be a topic that raises its head every few weeks.

Quote

 

Oddly enough those same people think Walder completely justified in slaughtering them all. 

Do they? 'Those same people'.

Generalizations are never a good tactic.

Quote

First of all you are very condescending.

lol you called my entire argument erroneous without bothering to justify your stance other than you were correct and you think I'm the only one being condescending in this discussion? Look in the mirror.

Quote

 

Citing Cersei doesn't make anyone desperate.

You mean wrong citing Cersei. As I proved, she did not say what he thought she said.

Is this really the hill the two of you want to die on, arguing over something Cersei did not actually say?

He was mistaken, it happens to us all, its a very large series, unless you have an eidetic memory the likelihood is that misremembering is going to happen. It's not a big deal.

Quote

 

The poster is showing that even the house that supported the RW knows the Frey's will likely suffer mass consequences for it.

The poster didn't, the poster claimed that Cersei would let House Frey fall as soon as Walder died. The poster was wrong. You do realize that, right?

Cersei thought the new Lord of House Frey would be happy to see a few relatives pay for those crimes. Cersei, certainly AFFC onwards, is not a great judge of character on how others react.

Quote

 

He/she didn't say anything about it being a good idea to piss off Frey's etc. So maybe you ought to read like you have stated to this poster a couple times.

Not once did I claim he did. Please quote where you think I said that?

What I did say that Cersei would be an idiot, even more so than she is in the books, if she was to allow House Frey, one of the few allies to her son's Crown, to fall. That is what I said. Please reread my post and when you reply to this one maybe reread it a few times before wrongly jumping to conclusions on what I have or have not said. It will save us both some time.

Quote

That is willingly joining them no? 

No, that is joining them over a contract.

If your employer decided to not pay you at the end of the month would you not have a problem with that?

Quote

 

Not remotely what I was arguing.

No, who said it was? I was giving an analogy to what happened to why the Freys were pissed when Robb fucked them over.

 

Quote

 

In your scenario the buyer willingly bought the house. Period.

Nope, reread.

Quote

 

I didn't say anything about not wanting justice because the house was trashed or whatever. Even if the house was trashed the issue the buyer has is that the property was not as bought, not that they were forced into buying it. 

Similar scenario, hotel suite. Trashed and then the guests (Robb) refused to pay for the damages. The Hotel (the Freys) would be right to want revenge.

Quote

No I haven't moved any goal posts.

Yeah, you have. At no point did I, the person you are replying to, claim it was legal or moral.

Once again you are moving the goal posts due to a poorly thought out argument.

Quote

 

If it's not justified legally or morally how exactly is it justified?

I'm English, maybe Justified has a different meaning where you are from, but in the UK you can be justified doing something without it being legal or moral, Walder had a valid reason for wanting revenge.

Besides, legal is a dumb argument to make given that Robb and Walder were rebels at the time. They were not subject to the laws of Westeros.

The only 'law' Walder broke was the law of the gods, if they are real and they truly care about guest rights then he will soon suffer a deserved punishment for that.

Quote

According to who? 

According to Robb.

"We must win back the Freys," said Robb. "With them, we still have some chance of success, however small. Without them, I see no hope. I am willing to give Lord Walder whatever he requires . . . apologies, honors, lands, gold . . . there must be something that would soothe his pride . . ."    

Robb was in desperate need of the Frey army to help him retake the North.

 

Quote

You made the claim, you quote it.

So that's a no, then? You can't prove it via a quote.

Quote

 

Show me what text suggests Robb was a horny 16 year old

Most 16 year old boys are horny. Robb does not seem to be any different and the fact that he raped an attractive prisoner and then married her seems to confirm this.

“His Grace King Robb is wed.” Bolton spit a prune pit into his hand and put it aside. “To a Westerling of the Crag. I am told her name is Jeyne. No doubt you know her, ser. Her father is your father’s bannerman.”  “My father has a good many bannermen, and most of them have daughters.” Jaime groped one-handed for his goblet, trying to recall this Jeyne. The Westerlings were an old house, with more pride than power.  “This cannot be true,” Brienne said stubbornly. “King Robb was sworn to wed a Frey. He would never break faith, he -”  “His Grace is a boy of sixteen,” said Roose Bolton mildly. “And I would thank you not to question my word, my lady.”  Jaime felt almost sorry for Robb Stark. He won the war on the battlefield and lost it in a bedchamber, poor fool.

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

The Westerling mines had failed years ago, their best lands had been sold off or lost, and the Crag was more ruin than stronghold. A romantic ruin, though, jutting up so brave above the sea. "I am surprised," Tyrion had to confess. "I thought Robb Stark had better sense."

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

Jeyne is bright as well as beautiful. And kind as well. She has a gentle heart."
It is swords you need, not gentle hearts. How could you do this, Robb? How could you be so heedless, so stupid? How could you be so . . . so very . . . young. Reproaches would not serve here, however.
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"That night, she . . . she comforted me, Mother."
Catelyn did not need to be told what sort of comfort Jeyne Westerling had offered her son. "And you wed her the next day."
 
He was a horny 16 year old who betrayed the Freys because he wanted to get laid.
 
 
Quote

 

let alone that is why he broke his promise. 

He broke his promise when he married Jeyne, who he barely knew. Many of us, not all, who hear about  teenagers who marry after a few weeks of knowing each other would call that lust, not love.

His dick made him break his promise.

Quote

You are contradicting yourself here. If no one cares who Robb sleeps with what possible bearing could Robb being horny & sleeping with someone have on the RW?? 

I'm not contradicting myself. Robb being horny is not an issue, Robb being so horny that he married the person he lusted after was the problem.

Quote

Yeah the RW was one big fit in response to Robb not marrying one of his kin. 

As well as the loss of Frey hundreds, maybe even up to a thousand Frey vassal lives including Walder's heir.

There can be more than one reason, you do understand that, right?

Quote

You are the only one I've seen likening the Frey's to Jews.

And? Am I responsible for who you talk to on this subject? I made a connection

  • In the middle ages the Jews features were frequently compared to rats, the Freys to Weasels
  • In the middle ages the Jews were not trusted because they were good with money, the same is true of the Freys

 

Whether it is deliberate by the author or not there are parallels between how people talk about the Freys in the series and how people talked about the Jews in the middle ages.

 

Quote

 

I haven't dehumanized them at all.

You have, you just have not realized it.

Quote

 

Nor have I said once Walder wasn't right to be angry. 

No,  but you are completely ignoring legitimate reasons why he is angry, like the loss of many Frey lives on Robb's broken promise.

By ignoring this and making out the only reason he is unhappy is due to the wedding you are dehumanizing him.

Quote

 

Well it was your claim that they do so really you should prove it but not one Frey lost their life because Robb married Jeyne.

They lost their life because Robb made an agreement, an agreement he pissed on when he decided he wanted to get laid and marry the attractive Jeyne.

"You have done House Frey a grievous insult, Robb."
"I never meant to. Ser Stevron died for me"
 
Robb fucked over the Freys, he himself can admit it.
Quote

 

If part of Walders wrath is due to losing people on the battle field it's just further proof of his ridiculousness.

lol there you go dehumanizing him again.

Robb goes to war because his father is arrested. I guess only the characters you like are allowed to be upset when their family members are hurt.

Quote

 

If he sent his men into battle believing none would be killed & that if they were he could hold Robb responsible & seek out revenge for it then I'm hard pressed to see how anyone thinks Walder is very smart. 

Why are you arguing in bad faith?  Had Robb not made an agreement with the Freys then they would never have fought for him.

I presume that you have a job, a job where your employer has made a deal with you to pay you a certain amount at the end of the month for what you have agreed to do. Would you not be angry if your employer refused to pay you what you had agreed after you had already done the work?

The Freys bled for Robb's broken promise. They have a right to be pissed.

Quote

 

I think you would have a hard time proving rape in a court but ok.

eh? I was more than clear with what I wrote. Why the need to constantly argue in bad faith?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rape

As a consequence, the rape of a virgin was often a more serious crime than of a non-virgin, even a wife or widow, and the rape of a prostitute or other unchaste woman was, in some laws, not a crime because her chastity could not be harmed. Furthermore, the woman's consent was under many legal systems not a defense. In seventeenth-century France, even marriage without parental consent was classified as rape

In the medieval world what Robb (and Rhaegar) did was rape regardless if Jeyne (Lyanna consented).  In our world Rhaegar would still a rapist given he had sex with a 15 year old girl, it's crazy how some people will defend and fetishize such behaviour.

Quote

 

His being horny would have been fulfilled by the rape or sex alone no? So it hardly explains the marriage.

Eh? No, not at all. If he was that attracted to her and wanted to have regular sex with her he'd marry her so he could continue banging her.

Many marriages happen due to lust, is this the first you are hearing of this?

Quote

 

The thing that ACTUALLY broke the contract with Walder. People don't get married because they are horny. 

Yeah, they do. My parents did.

Many marriages between people who barely know each other discover that they were in lust, not love. Many others have happy, loving marriages, but it genuinely surprises me that you have never heard of people marring out of lust. Either you are being genuine or you are lying to make a point.

Quote

If he will suffer deserved retribution then how we're his acts justified? 

I said his need for vengeance was justified, which it was.

Look, I'm English, I'm using the English definition of the word. I'm sorry if whichever country your from has a different definition of the word, I respect that we may both be correct on this matter and are simply arguing semantics.

If the gods are real he will suffer deserved retribution, just as Robb did.

Quote

You are using Robb breaking a marriage contract as a justification for the RW

A bit more than that. I am using the loss of lives who died for Robb's broken promise as justification for Walder's revenge.

Quote

 

 

Again there is no textual basis for Robb thinking with his dick equalling Robb breaking his betrothal.

Yeah, there is. I have given four quotes that insinuate that Robb was acting as a dumb teenage boy, which he was.

 

Quote

 

Furthermore if Walder was extremely worried about losing his son that he had groomed for 60 years to the point that he was willing to slaughter unarmed people if he died in battle he probably should not have sent him into battle. 

lol so it's Walder's fault. Not Robb for breaking his promise?

Walder would have accepted his son dying, but his son dying for a broken promise is an insult. Just like your manager refusing to pay you your earned salary would be an insult to you, no?

Quote

So every battle Commander is directly responsible for the lives lost under him

No, not one did I say that. Please stop creating straw man arguments.

The Freys supported Robb due to a deal he made, they bled, some died, for that deal. They fulfilled their part of the deal, Robb refused to do his. They have a right to be angry and seek retribution.

 

I'll respond to the rest of your post later, it is getting tiring replying to so many straw arguments.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Robb was in lust, he fancied his prisoner Jeyne and by the standards of the day raped his prisoner.

This reminds me of all the famous sportsman and singers that always get accused of rape by women.

Gods so by your standards if a woman gives herself willingly it is rape? What if Jeyne fancies the young wolf. A handsome warrior king that has captured her home and taken her family captive, maybe it turns her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
2
13 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

This is absurd & pointless. I don't know what you don't get about Robb not marrying a Frey not killing anyone but clearly no matter how I put it to you, you aren't going to get it. 

I'm not going to respond to the rest, we are getting nowhere & you are very frustrating to conversate with. 

Your arrogance is more than I can handle & most of your arguments are invalid. You repeatedly accuse me of moving goal posts & have accused other posters of being condescending all while doing everyone of these things. 

He is clearly very knowledgeable in asoiaf @Bernie Mac, and from time to time he makes some interesting points. But when it involves a discussion about a character he dislikes, his emotions get the better of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Robb does not seem to be any different and the fact that he raped an attractive prisoner...

"That night, she . . . she comforted me, Mother."
Catelyn did not need to be told what sort of comfort Jeyne Westerling had offered her son. "And you wed her the next day."
 
 

I don't need to read anything else...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok

 

Like this is the thing, Game of Thrones has a lot of people with different motivations and different possible outcomes.

The Freys are very, very specific, they aren't interested in a lot of things involving the Game of Thrones, except, marriage/inheritance and following the laws.

 

They are incredibly law, it's a form of law that they practice with regard to gurantees and relations, they do it because it's just how they live and you can see how it's culturally relevant.

 

Robb Stark and the Starks in general just don't care, they don't think it has any value.

 

The point is that Frey was simply more connivving, it's cheesy and said often in school but there's no absolute right or wrong just who won to a certain extent.

 

I don't think Frey would venture far outside the castle, to be honest, I think the Freys are just superior militarily as well, their castle and fortifications and overall position and prestige are vastly superior to the Starks, who are only as strong as the strongest Stark. They need pure charisma to succeed and the difference between Ned and Robb is extraordinary.

 

Basically Starks need superior extreme savant outlier personalities to be relevant, whereas the freys are powerful and savants and can more steadily rely on various things because of their superior fortitude and stamina.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×