Did Jon Arryn even believe the twincest story?

[Canon Claude]

On 8/3/2020 at 10:13 PM, Lee-Sensei said:

Nah. Genocide is always evil. Killing Balon, Euron, Victarion and maybe Euron afterwards? Okay. Fine. Killing Asha, Theon and every other Ironborn? Building a mountain out of their skulls? Nope. That’s evil.

I didn't endorse genocide. I offered an option different from Cersei and Robert's positions. Remove the Greyjoys from power, remove the Ironborn from the Iron Islands, and give them different homes across the Westeros coastline, scattered from each other, unable to live out their disgusting culture (and it IS a disgusting culture, I don't care what you say about the Ironborn to defend them), repopulate the Iron Islands with other houses who don't follow the original culture. Few people die, and the toxicity that is "the old way" is exterminated at long effing last. 

[Lee-Sensei]

1 hour ago, Canon Claude said:

I didn't endorse genocide. I offered an option different from Cersei and Robert's positions. Remove the Greyjoys from power, remove the Ironborn from the Iron Islands, and give them different homes across the Westeros coastline, scattered from each other, unable to live out their disgusting culture (and it IS a disgusting culture, I don't care what you say about the Ironborn to defend them), repopulate the Iron Islands with other houses who don't follow the original culture. Few people die, and the toxicity that is "the old way" is exterminated at long effing last. 

1) Sorry. I guess that I didn’t finish reading.

2) Moving the Iron Islanders? There has to be at least around a million of them. The logistics of that are nightmarish.

3) All Westerosi have a disgusting culture.

4) What mainlanders would want to move to the Iron Islands?

[James Steller]

2 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

1) Sorry. I guess that I didn’t finish reading.

2) Moving the Iron Islanders? There has to be at least around a million of them. The logistics of that are nightmarish.

3) All Westerosi have a disgusting culture.

4) What mainlanders would want to move to the Iron Islands?

Logistically it would be a nightmare. The forced deportation of a population in human history has often resulted in many deaths regardless of any intention to avoid slaughter. Though to be honest, Claude does have a point about the Iron Islanders. I know Westeros is awful overall but the Ironborn have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. They literally exist to hurt others and brag about being good at it. 

[Lee-Sensei]

40 minutes ago, James Steller said:

Logistically it would be a nightmare. The forced deportation of a population in human history has often resulted in many deaths regardless of any intention to avoid slaughter. Though to be honest, Claude does have a point about the Iron Islanders. I know Westeros is awful overall but the Ironborn have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. They literally exist to hurt others and brag about being good at it. 

There are a lot of reforming Ironborn. Rodrik Harlaw, Asha Greyjoy, Quellon Greyjoy, Lord Goodbrother and evening Theon said that the Old Way is done.

[Ser Leftwich]

I am not a MOD, but this is getting wildly off-topic.

[James Steller]

2 hours ago, Ser Leftwich said:

I am not a MOD, but this is getting wildly off-topic.

All the same, point well made with your earlier reply.

[Bael's Bastard]

He might have believed it, but not believed he could prove it to Robert, who apparently rarely heeded Jon's good advice. And Jon himself seem more pragmatic than anything. He spent considerable effort solidifying Robert's rule. He encouraged the alliance with the Lannisters in the first place despite knowing they had murdered Rhaegar's children and wife. He might not have been in a hurry to blow things up. Whether he believed it or not, he apparently kept it to himself. Why?

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

He might have believed it, but not believed he could prove it to Robert, who apparently rarely heeded Jon's good advice. And Jon himself seem more pragmatic than anything. He spent considerable effort solidifying Robert's rule. He encouraged the alliance with the Lannisters in the first place despite knowing they had murdered Rhaegar's children and wife. He might not have been in a hurry to blow things up. Whether he believed it or not, he apparently kept it to himself. Why?

That is the question. The original point is that one can imagine he actually still was lucid enough to tell Robert when the king spend time with him, but didn't say anything. Even if you follow the arguments that he was no longer capable of thinking/talking coherently then - it is very odd that he didn't take any steps informing Robert prior to that or refuse to see the king in a state of mind where he could no longer talk clearly.

Cersei and her people didn't want Robert and Ned to have their last conversation in a state where Robert was still lucid, but they couldn't prevent that, either. And when Jon fell ill and died Cersei and Jaime weren't even in the capital.

A possible idea I tossed around above is that a Jon firmly believing the twincest stuff might have not told Robert the truth when he was dying because he realized Robert would fuck things up if he was told and he, Jon, was no longer there to guide him. This entire thing had the potential to ruin and utterly destroy the Baratheon dynasty.

Jon thought Robert needed Tywin and the Lannisters if the Targaryens ever came back ... so destroying them might be just the first step in destroying the Baratheons.

This idea that Robert taking Margaery as a new wife doesn't necessarily give Robert the allegiance of all the Reach, does it? If Viserys III shows up and half or two thirds of the Reach lords stand with the Targaryen pretender then the Tyrells will like stay out of the war, no matter whether Margaery is queen or not. And with the Lannisters no longer in camp Baratheon and them/the Westermen in general being more inclined to side with the Targaryens in the wake of what happened with Jaime/Cersei and/or the children things could get very dire very fast.

[Lee-Sensei]

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is the question. The original point is that one can imagine he actually still was lucid enough to tell Robert when the king spend time with him, but didn't say anything. Even if you follow the arguments that he was no longer capable of thinking/talking coherently then - it is very odd that he didn't take any steps informing Robert prior to that or refuse to see the king in a state of mind where he could no longer talk clearly.

Cersei and her people didn't want Robert and Ned to have their last conversation in a state where Robert was still lucid, but they couldn't prevent that, either. And when Jon fell ill and died Cersei and Jaime weren't even in the capital.

A possible idea I tossed around above is that a Jon firmly believing the twincest stuff might have not told Robert the truth when he was dying because he realized Robert would fuck things up if he was told and he, Jon, was no longer there to guide him. This entire thing had the potential to ruin and utterly destroy the Baratheon dynasty.

Jon thought Robert needed Tywin and the Lannisters if the Targaryens ever came back ... so destroying them might be just the first step in destroying the Baratheons.

This idea that Robert taking Margaery as a new wife doesn't necessarily give Robert the allegiance of all the Reach, does it? If Viserys III shows up and half or two thirds of the Reach lords stand with the Targaryen pretender then the Tyrells will like stay out of the war, no matter whether Margaery is queen or not. And with the Lannisters no longer in camp Baratheon and them/the Westermen in general being more inclined to side with the Targaryens in the wake of what happened with Jaime/Cersei and/or the children things could get very dire very fast.

1) Robert was a capable general and Ned felt that if the truth of the Lannisters crimes out he would destroy the Lannisters like he destroyed the Targaryens, so I doubt that was it.

"This was the boy he had grown up with, he thought; this was the Robert Baratheon he'd known and loved. If he could prove that the Lannisters were behind the attack on Bran, prove that they had murdered Jon Arryn, this man would listen. Then Cersei would fall, and the kingslayer with her, and if Lord Tywin dared to rouse the west, Robert would smash him as he had smashed Rhaegar Targaryen on the Trident. He could see it all so clearly."

2) The Reach would side with Robert if they got a marriage out of it and the Lannisters can’t slide with Viserys after murdering his sister-in-law and his nephew and niece.

[Only 89 selfies today]

He did, in my opinion.  But please consider how dangerous this belief was.  This is the kind of information you keep to yourself unless you want more blood on your hands.  And Jon already has a lot of blood for calling the rebellion earlier.  Is it worth tearing Robert's fragile rule apart?  That was what would most concern a man like Jon Arryn.  Can revealing this knowledge destroy Robert's reign?  I believe it would have.  The Lannisters are too strong.  Strong enough to rip the kingdom apart.