Would YOU have pushed Bran out the window?

[Bourne]

He did not throw Bran out the window because he wanted to save lives. He did it to save himself and Cersei. Just them and no one else. What he should have done was not kill in order to save lives, as you suggest...which just doesn't make sense to me because the act of killing negates the logic of saving lives.

He should have taken Cersei and his kids and fled, leave Westeros entirely and start a new life somewhere else.

Even if he only did it to save himself and Cersei that's two lives against one. So he's still at plus 1.

And exactly how easy would it be to run off with the queen, the crown prince, and the kings other two children? Even if they did escape (which I can't see happening) Robert would have them hunted to the ends of the earth. They would still die. And I can't see Tywin sitting idly by for that one either. Honestly, running away would be the cowardly and more selfish thing to do.

[LordBloodraven]

Even if he only did it to save himself and Cersei that's two lives against one. So he's still at plus 1.

Two worthless lives vs the life of an innocent boy.

[Shaggydog Stark]

Even if he only did it to save himself and Cersei that's two lives against one. So he's still at plus 1.

And exactly how easy would it be to run off with the queen, the crown prince, and the kings other two children? Even if they did escape (which I can't see happening) Robert would have them hunted to the ends of the earth. They would still die. And I can't see Tywin sitting idly by for that one either. Honestly, running away would be the cowardly and more selfish thing to do.

Obviously, the morally correct thing to have done would have been to own up and take personal responsibility and face the consequences, even if it meant death. But that sort of thing takes a special kind of person, not everyone is capable of such courage, I don't know if I could have done that to be honest. I would probably be scared to death and Cersei would have been thinking of her children, etc.

However, we are talking of two fictional characters who's very nature is selfish and narcissist. Therefore, I don't expect that from them and we would not have had a story if they had. Having said that, everything in me rejects the idea of killing a child for witnessing an act which they were responsible for and which they knew would have been risky. I will not start a discussion of why couldn't they control themselves until they returned to KL, etc.

Anyway, since they were unable to do so for whatever reason and they were caught in the act, they could have either scared the child into silence as Cersei suggested until a later time when they could think rationally for solutions and alternatives or they could have done the least honorable thing and fled. It might be cowardly but it would have been at least honorable compared to the alternative of flinging a child out of a window. I know they had limited choices, but they were the adults and they put themselves in this position, so at least they could have taken a little personal responsibility and fled.

True, they would probably have spent the rest of their lives on the run because Robert would have wanted them caught, but if you can't face the time don't do the crime.

Honestly, don't you think it was the dumbest thing in the world to have sex in Winterfell of all places?

As for saving two lives vs one. That's not how I measure the value of life. The way I look at it, they were saving the lives of two people guilty of treason (according to their own laws) versus an innocent child's, who's only crime was that he liked climbing walls. In addition, in their society the act they were committing was an abomination, which means it goes beyond breaking the law.

I appreciate however that they did not have the time to consider these things and events happened rapidly, but if you value life, you don't kill, not even one person, because once you do, you are being a hypocrite and killing becomes easy as life becomes cheap. You don't save lives by killing, you devalue life when you kill.

[Bourne]

Honestly, don't you think it was the dumbest thing in the world to have sex in Winterfell of all places?

Yep.

I appreciate however that they did not have the time to consider these things and events happened rapidly, but if you value life, you don't kill, not even one person, because once you do, you are being a hypocrite and killing becomes easy as life becomes cheap. You don't save lives by killing, you devalue life when you kill.

In principle I agree with you. But they live in Westeros, and Westerosi culture does not value life as it is.

If you choose to value the life of Bran (because he's an innocent child) over the lives of Jaime and Cersei (because they're not innocent), you are already doing the same thing as Jaime. You made a judgement call (which you're welcome to do, but so is Jaime). You can't complain about Jaime subjectively choosing that his and Cersei's lives are more valuable than Bran's if you're willing to say that Bran's is more valuable than theirs (And lets be honest, as messed up as the Twins are their lives are a lot more valuable than Bran's. He's the second son of the Warden of the North (not invaluable), but they are the queen of Westeros and the greatest warrior in the realm. Objectively speaking, they are worth more than Bran.)

As for the rest, I'm not really defending Jaime's actions because yes, his motives were probably pretty selfish. I'm just explaining why, if I were in that situation, I think it would be better to kill him.

If Bran lets the secret out, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die.

If they flee, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die (or at the very least, three innocents die).

If Bran is thrown out the window, one innocent dies (at least that's the idea).

They are all pretty bad options, but I think the latter is the least wrong of the three.

[Alexia]

Is this a trick question?

You are asking whether I would have murdered a child, for seeing me do something wrong?

Anyone who answers yes to that question, and actually acts upon their answer, would be in line for capital punishment in any state that still carries the death penalty.

That's murdering a child because they were a witness to your crime. Only the most despicable and reviled of criminals fall into that category.

This is where the questions starts and ends for me. Very well said.

[LordBloodraven]

Yep.

In principle I agree with you. But they live in Westeros, and Westerosi culture does not value life as it is.

If you choose to value the life of Bran (because he's an innocent child) over the lives of Jaime and Cersei (because they're not innocent), you are already doing the same thing as Jaime. You made a judgement call (which you're welcome to do, but so is Jaime). You can't complain about Jaime subjectively choosing that his and Cersei's lives are more valuable than Bran's if you're willing to say that Bran's is more valuable than theirs (And lets be honest, as messed up as the Twins are their lives are a lot more valuable than Bran's. He's the second son of the Warden of the North (not invaluable), but they are the queen of Westeros and the greatest warrior in the realm. Objectively speaking, they are worth more than Bran.)

As for the rest, I'm not really defending Jaime's actions because yes, his motives were probably pretty selfish. I'm just explaining why, if I were in that situation, I think it would be better to kill him.

If Bran lets the secret out, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die.

If they flee, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die (or at the very least, three innocents die).

If Bran is thrown out the window, one innocent dies (at least that's the idea).

They are all pretty bad options, but I think the latter is the least wrong of the three.

In every society there are codes of law/moral/responsibility which determine what you will get for doing something wrong. If you are bold enough to do something irresponsible, wrong, and dangerous, I expect of you to face the consequences like a man.

Jaime and Cersei knew perfectly that they were putting in danger the lives of their 3 kids by continuing their affair. Jaime didn't even care about them, until he get in ser Goldenhand the just mode in ASOS. Jaime and Cersei are idiots and behaved like idiots.

How could Cersei's life be more important than Bran's? She's the Queen, she knows that she has duty towards the realm, yet she commits high treason towards her king, and incest with her twin brother. It's not because she's the Queen, she can do anything she wants; she realized it when the High Septon said "No" to her. Jaime was one of the greatest swordsman in Westeros, but I wonder if he could win a war (or lead men) by himself.

By sleeping with her twin, she and Jaime were planting the seeds of war. Tywin wouldn't sit idly while her daughter was executed and Ned wouldn't sit idly too, while knowing they attempted to murder his son under his roof.

If you do something wrong, you just face the consequences. And pushing Bran wasn't to save thousands of lives; they didn't care about those lives, if they did, they wouldn't have to push Bran at first.

[Medieval Housefly]



That's murdering a child because they were a witness to your crime. Only the most despicable and reviled of criminals fall into that category.


The murdering of a child is obviously a sick and vile thing, but as with all crimes not everything is black and white and there are often many gray areas. For the reason of covering your crime I agree that it's despicable and vile; however, what if you add additional elements to the situation, such as, to save your love, and to save your three children. I honestly can't say how far I'd go to save the life of my child because I've never been tested, but I can say I'd go farther than I would think possible.

I actually didn't think it was a bad or trick question, but rather a thought provoking one.

[Shaggydog Stark]

Yep.

In principle I agree with you. But they live in Westeros, and Westerosi culture does not value life as it is.

If you choose to value the life of Bran (because he's an innocent child) over the lives of Jaime and Cersei (because they're not innocent), you are already doing the same thing as Jaime.

But that's not what I am saying. I said the better option for them is to flee, especially since the witness is an innocent child. Bran would not have been put in this position in the first place had Jaime and Cersei practiced some self control. What are they adolescents with raging hormones that they can't wait until they get back to KL?

You can't complain about Jaime subjectively choosing that his and Cersei's lives are more valuable than Bran's if you're willing to say that Bran's is more valuable than theirs (And lets be honest, as messed up as the Twins are their lives are a lot more valuable than Bran's. He's the second son of the Warden of the North (not invaluable), but they are the queen of Westeros and the greatest warrior in the realm. Objectively speaking, they are worth more than Bran.)

Bourne, honestly this argument is warped. I don't know where to begin...they are more valuable because of their positions? So if Bran had been the son of a peasant instead of the Warden of the North it would be alright to fling him out of a window, because in that case he would be worthless? I am sorry I can't accept this logic.

As for the rest, I'm not really defending Jaime's actions because yes, his motives were probably pretty selfish. I'm just explaining why, if I were in that situation, I think it would be better to kill him.

Nothing justifies killing an innocent child. You may be saying this now, but had you really been in that position I don't think you would have been able to push him. It takes a certain amount of callousness to do that and I think it is very different to read about it than to actually commit the act. i am sure had the moment arrived something within you would have restrained you and you would not have been able to go through with it.

If Bran lets the secret out, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die.

If they flee, it starts a war and thousands of innocents die (or at the very least, three innocents die).

If Bran is thrown out the window, one innocent dies (at least that's the idea).

They are all pretty bad options, but I think the latter is the least wrong of the three.

No if they had fled, nobody would have died unless they were caught. This is the best option imho and it is the advice that Ned gave Cersei when he was being merciful.

[Bastard Walder]

But that's not what I am saying. I said the better option for them is to flee, especially since the witness is an innocent child. Bran would not have been put in this position in the first place had Jaime and Cersei practiced some self control. What are they adolescents with raging hormones that they can't wait until they get back to KL?

Bourne, honestly this argument is warped. I don't know where to begin...they are more valuable because of their positions? So if Bran had been the son of a peasant instead of the Warden of the North it would be alright to fling him out of a window, because in that case he would be worthless? I am sorry I can't accept this logic.

Nothing justifies killing an innocent child. You may be saying this now, but had you really been in that position I don't think you would have been able to push him. It takes a certain amount of callousness to do that and I think it is very different to read about it than to actually commit the act. i am sure had the moment arrived something within you would have restrained you and you would not have been able to go through with it.

No if they had fled, nobody would have died unless they were caught. This is the best option imho and it is the advice that Ned gave Cersei when he was being merciful.

Just flee? What the hell? If I were Jaime I'd kill 1000 kids before being caught.

[eyeheartsansa]

Considering that Robert has been failing to notice the peculiarity of his blond haired offsprings for 15+ years do you really think that the testimony of a 7 year old boy is going to change that?

Another way to see it - would be to say that Robert has developed a skill of "not seeing what was in front of him", and after 15 years of practice he's pretty good at it I think :D

You may say mayhaps but it was no bygone certainty.

I think this is a great point. I really don't think Joff, Tommen, ect. would have been executed - Tywin pretty much owns Robert and neither he nor Cercei would not have allowed this to happen. I'm not sure what Robert would have done, but one way or another It would have been covered up, and it's doubtful a war would have started.

Pushing Bran, on the other hand, risks a huge shitstorm with the Starks, and actually did set off a chain of events leading to war.. Joff sends assassin after Bran -> Littlefinger blames Tyrion -> Cat has Tyrion arrested -> Tywin looses the Mountain on the Riverlands / Jaime kills a bunch of Ned's men.

[Bastard Walder]

I think this is a great point. I really don't think Joff, Tommen, ect. would have been executed - Tywin pretty much owns Robert and neither he nor Cercei would not have allowed this to happen. I'm not sure what Robert would have done, but one way or another It would have been covered up, and it's doubtful a war would have started.

Pushing Bran, on the other hand, risks a huge shitstorm with the Starks, and actually did set off a chain of events leading to war.. Joff sends assassin after Bran -> Littlefinger blames Tyrion -> Cat has Tyrion arrested -> Tywin looses the Mountain on the Riverlands / Jaime kills a bunch of Ned's men.

Well that is all Joffrey and Littlefinger's fault.

[LadyoftheNorth72]

If I knew what all the future Bran chapters were going to be like I would have made sure he died when I pushed him out of that window. Headfirst should have done it, no amount of wolf howling would save him then.

Literally lol'ed. I have not read a Bran chapter since ACOK. I just kind of scan them to see if there is anything important - nope - and move on to the next POV. Kind of sad because I have a son a lot like Bran was described to be at first, but much as I love him, I would not invest hours reading and rereading his school essays either.

On to Jaime. Here are my thoughts. In the later books, as we come to know why and how Jaime killed Aerys, my heart really goes out to him. This was not a simple matter of a teenage kid (which he was, or bare 20's) deciding to side with his family in a rebellion. This is a kid who has been forced to watch, condone, and be involved in the worst kind of atrocities, all because of a vow he took when he barely understood what it meant. jaime had no more clue what he was really signing up for than Jon did joining the NW. He had become jaded and hardened really through no direct fault of his own; he is simply trying to not get burnt, same as the rest of the court.

Once he knows his father has joined the rebellion, and Aerys orders him to bring him Tywin's head, Jaime knows it is not just Tywin's but his entire family will be wiped out if Aerys prevails. So he kills Aerys, in the world's most justified case of regicide ever. Then, he spends the next 12-15 years being mocked, reviled, and spat upon by everyone he meets, even the people WHO WERE PART OF THE REBELLION. What did they plan to do with Aerys, find him a nice retirement home? Jaime only did what had to be done. And everyone goes on and on about the oath he broke - I don't know about Westeros, but in Medieval/Renaissance Europe, it was implied if not stated law that EVERY subject had a moral and legal duty to fight and perhaps die for their monarch. Even simply knowing about treason and not reporting it was a capital offense. So IMO, Jaime is surrounded for over a decade by swarms of utter hypocrites, pinning rude nicknames on him and reviling him for the one heroic thing he has ever done.

My point is, after a while, that makes you bitter and changes who you are. You would start to act like an asshat, because if everyone is going to treat you like one anyway, why not? Gradually the moral code you once believed in starts to seem like a cosmic joke. And after a while, the only thing you care about anymore is your lover (who unfortunately happens to be your sister, but since you grew up in a kingdom ruled by a family who practiced regular incest, it is easier to justify it to yourself). At this point, I don't think he cares much about the kids one way or the other, but he does love Cersei.

By the time he pushed Bran out that window, Jaime just did not have any moral compass left. I am not saying it was right or excusible by any means. I am looking for explanation, not excuse. He had just become the irredeemable Kingslayer so thoroughly in his own head, that he forgets what is true politics/battle, and what is not. He instantly sees the problem of Bran as a battle to be won, and it is simple to win. Eliminate the enemy.

Incidentally, I also think this is the pivotal point where Jaime's shell begins to crack, and he very slowly starts to turn back into a human being with thoughts beyond himself. When Joff dies, he cannot grieve for him, andwonders what is wrong with him that he can't. I honestly believe he starts to try to redeem himself for all those years of being a selfish ass, first by starting to think of Tommen (and protect him) as he would a son, and then by trying to help Brienne rescue the Stark girls. I think if he had any clue Bran and Rickon were still alive, hewould also be trying to find Rickon and keep him safe, and talk Bran out of becoming a tree.

So to answer the question, if I had been Jaime, given his life thus far and the position I was in, unfortunately I probably would have done the same thing, with no more thought than he gave it. But I also hope that like Jaime, it would start me on the road to some self reflection and change.

[Shaggydog Stark]

I think this is a great point. I really don't think Joff, Tommen, ect. would have been executed - Tywin pretty much owns Robert and neither he nor Cercei would not have allowed this to happen. I'm not sure what Robert would have done, but one way or another It would have been covered up, and it's doubtful a war would have started.

Pushing Bran, on the other hand, risks a huge shitstorm with the Starks, and actually did set off a chain of events leading to war.. Joff sends assassin after Bran -> Littlefinger blames Tyrion -> Cat has Tyrion arrested -> Tywin looses the Mountain on the Riverlands / Jaime kills a bunch of Ned's men.

I was just thinking about it. In the worst case, if bran had gone and told everyone about what he had seen,Jaime and Cersei could have said that he was mistaken, or something. Bran didn't have any actual proof and he didn't really understand what was happening so there was no need to even worry about it.

[Karla Rome]

Bourne, honestly this argument is warped. I don't know where to begin...they are more valuable because of their positions? So if Bran had been the son of a peasant instead of the Warden of the North it would be alright to fling him out of a window, because in that case he would be worthless? I am sorry I can't accept this logic.

I think what he means is that the Westerosi society would always place the Queen and one of the greatest warriors in the realm above the second son of a (although very powerful) lord. I don't personally find that their lives are more "valuable," but then again, who remembers the miller's boys in ACOK?

On a side note, similar to LadyoftheNorth72's post, I find it interesting that some people say Jaime was somewhat intentionally saving lives (besides himself and Cersei) by pushing Bran. I think it is very clear from his first few chapters in ASOS he dgaf about anyone anymore because of how saving everyone in KL gave him the title Kingslayer. He no longer cared about saving anyone due to the repercussions of his one good act.

[brashcandy]

The murdering of a child is obviously a sick and vile thing, but as with all crimes not everything is black and white and there are often many gray areas. For the reason of covering your crime I agree that it's despicable and vile; however, what if you add additional elements to the situation, such as, to save your love, and to save your three children. I honestly can't say how far I'd go to save the life of my child because I've never been tested, but I can say I'd go farther than I would think possible.

I actually didn't think it was a bad or trick question, but rather a thought provoking one.

There are no additional elements to be added for god's sake. Jaime did not care anything about his children. He cared that if they were found out it would mean he would have to stop sleeping with Cersei, and enjoying the benefits of being an honoured knight in the KG with a powerful house behind him.

[Medieval Housefly]

There are no additional elements to be added for god's sake. Jaime did not care anything about his children. He cared that if they were found out it would mean he would have to stop sleeping with Cersei, and enjoying the benefits of being an honoured knight in the KG with a powerful house behind him.

I wasn't necessarily saying that Jamie cared so much as much as I was saying if I were in Jamie's shoes than that is what I would think about. Jamie did not have a good relationship with the children because of Cersei, that much is clear. The person I was quoting had asked if it was a trick question and was all offended, I was merely saying I thought it was a good question, and that the murder of a child can also be gray.

[Karla Rome]

I was just thinking about it. In the worst case, if bran had gone and told everyone about what he had seen,Jaime and Cersei could have said that he was mistaken, or something. Bran didn't have any actual proof and he didn't really understand what was happening so there was no need to even worry about it.

:agree: If they had immediately confronted Bran about what happened, it would have been very easy to blur his recollections of what had happened. When Bran became older and knew what sex was, when he would think about that weird day that he almost fell from the tower, he would have thought more about himself "falling" and Jaime saving him as opposed to what he has doing with the queen.

[Bourne]

In every society there are codes of law/moral/responsibility which determine what you will get for doing something wrong. If you are bold enough to do something irresponsible, wrong, and dangerous, I expect of you to face the consequences like a man.

Jaime and Cersei knew perfectly that they were putting in danger the lives of their 3 kids by continuing their affair. Jaime didn't even care about them, until he get in ser Goldenhand the just mode in ASOS. Jaime and Cersei are idiots and behaved like idiots.

How could Cersei's life be more important than Bran's? She's the Queen, she knows that she has duty towards the realm, yet she commits high treason towards her king, and incest with her twin brother. It's not because she's the Queen, she can do anything she wants; she realized it when the High Septon said "No" to her. Jaime was one of the greatest swordsman in Westeros, but I wonder if he could win a war (or lead men) by himself.

By sleeping with her twin, she and Jaime were planting the seeds of war. Tywin wouldn't sit idly while her daughter was executed and Ned wouldn't sit idly too, while knowing they attempted to murder his son under his roof.

If you do something wrong, you just face the consequences. And pushing Bran wasn't to save thousands of lives; they didn't care about those lives, if they did, they wouldn't have to push Bran at first.

Agreed.

For some reason you all keep on thinking I'm defending Jaime. Most likely he threw Bran out the window for the wrong reason.

I'm just saying he did the right thing, even if it was for the wrong reasons.

And that's why I would throw Bran out the window in the same situation. Because It's for the greater good. Despicable, yes.

But that's not what I am saying. I said the better option for them is to flee, especially since the witness is an innocent child. Bran would not have been put in this position in the first place had Jaime and Cersei practiced some self control. What are they adolescents with raging hormones that they can't wait until they get back to KL?

I agree that it's their fault Bran is in that position. They shouldn't have done that. But when it comes time to make the decision the past becomes irrelevant. All that matters is what will be the effects of there decision. And I think it'd be better for one person to die than thousands. Not a savory position, but still.

Bourne, honestly this argument is warped. I don't know where to begin...they are more valuable because of their positions? So if Bran had been the son of a peasant instead of the Warden of the North it would be alright to fling him out of a window, because in that case he would be worthless? I am sorry I can't accept this logic.

It was never alright to fling him out a window. I was only saying that if you're basing your argument on the value of life, Cersei and Jaime are in a better position to do good than Bran. They have more power and could have a much greater positive effect on the realm than Bran could. Therefore their lives are more valuable to the realm than Bran's. Disregarding ability, all lives obviously have the same worth.

Nothing justifies killing an innocent child. You may be saying this now, but had you really been in that position I don't think you would have been able to push him. It takes a certain amount of callousness to do that and I think it is very different to read about it than to actually commit the act. i am sure had the moment arrived something within you would have restrained you and you would not have been able to go through with it.

Well I definitely wouldn't be as nonchalant about it as Jaime. It's obviously a horrible thing to have to do. I just think It's worse to condemn thousands to death by not doing it. Cowardly even.

No if they had fled, nobody would have died unless they were caught. This is the best option imho and it is the advice that Ned gave Cersei when he was being merciful.

Well I'd have to disagree. That's too big a thing for it not to cause some uproar in the kingdom. And they would eventually have been caught and killed. Even if Jaime manages to kill any assassins that come after them those are still people who didn't need to die. I guess we'll just have to disagree. And pray that none of us are ever actually in that position.

At least we can agree on which direwolf is the best :)

Sidenote: Lots of people keep on arguing why it wasn't ok for Jaime to do it because all he cared about was himself and Cersei. He didn't care about his children or the realm and so on. But the question wasn't should Jaime have pushed Bran out the window, or even if Jaime's reasoning for pushing him out was justified, it was whether or not we would do it in his position. So his reasoning is irrelevant. (That's not directed at you Shaggydog)

[Shaggydog Stark]

So to answer the question, if I had been Jaime, given his life thus far and the position I was in, unfortunately I probably would have done the same thing, with no more thought than he gave it. But I also hope that like Jaime, it would start me on the road to some self reflection and change.

I enjoyed reading your post, but i have a problem with this part. What about Bran and his dreams of becoming a knight? Jaime took that from him. The issue here is not Jaime's redemption, but Bran's life ruined.

On a side note, similar to LadyoftheNorth72's post, I find it interesting that some people say Jaime was somewhat intentionally saving lives (besides himself and Cersei) by pushing Bran. I think it is very clear from his first few chapters in ASOS he dgaf about anyone anymore because of how saving everyone in KL gave him the title Kingslayer. He no longer cared about saving anyone due to the repercussions of his one good act.

Exactly! :)

:agree: If they had immediately confronted Bran about what happened, it would have been very easy to blur his recollections of what had happened. When Bran became older and knew what sex was, when he would think about that weird day that he almost fell from the tower, he would have thought more about himself "falling" and Jaime saving him as opposed to what he has doing with the queen.

Yeah, it is easy to confuse a child. It wouldn't have been difficult with someone as naive as Bran.

Agreed.

For some reason you all keep on thinking I'm defending Jaime. Most likely he threw Bran out the window for the wrong reason.

I'm just saying he did the right thing, even if it was for the wrong reasons.

And that's why I would throw Bran out the window in the same situation. Because It's for the greater good. Despicable, yes.

I agree that it's their fault Bran is in that position. They shouldn't have done that. But when it comes time to make the decision the past becomes irrelevant. All that matters is what will be the effects of there decision. And I think it'd be better for one person to die than thousands. Not a savory position, but still.

It was never alright to fling him out a window. I was only saying that if you're basing your argument on the value of life, Cersei and Jaime are in a better position to do good than Bran. They have more power and could have a much greater positive effect on the realm than Bran could. Therefore their lives are more valuable to the realm than Bran's. Disregarding ability, all lives obviously have the same worth.

Well I definitely wouldn't be as nonchalant about it as Jaime. It's obviously a horrible thing to have to do. I just think It's worse to condemn thousands to death by not doing it. Cowardly even.

Well I'd have to disagree. That's too big a thing for it not to cause some uproar in the kingdom. And they would eventually have been caught and killed. Even if Jaime manages to kill any assassins that come after them those are still people who didn't need to die. I guess we'll just have to disagree. And pray that none of us are ever actually in that position.

I came up with another option Bourne, see if you can live with that at least. I need to get you off this path of self destruction! :lol:

At least we can agree on which direwolf is the best

:thumbsup:

[brashcandy]

I wasn't necessarily saying that Jamie cared so much as much as I was saying if I were in Jamie's shoes than that is what I would think about. Jamie did not have a good relationship with the children because of Cersei, that much is clear. The person I was quoting had asked if it was a trick question and was all offended, I was merely saying I thought it was a good question, and that the murder of a child can also be gray.

Ok fine. But IMO, Jaime did not have a good relationship with those children because of Jaime. Cersei may not have wanted him to interact with them on a frequent basis, but there were ways that he could have tried if he was inclined to. Jaime's neglect of his children is not another burden that Cersei should bear- given how most people already see her as the one who used and abused poor Jaime :rolleyes: