David Selig Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Then why bother reading the books? I would note as well that the Northmen went willingly. Their Stark and his heir had been brutally murdered. What exactly do you base this claim on? We haven't had a PoV from any non-Stark Northerner, and IIRC we don't even have any statements about this rebellion from Northerners outside the highest ranked nobles. Jorah was a Northerner and he said in no uncertain terms that the smallfolk want to be left alone and not to be in involved in the political games and wars of the nobles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 WHAT? I just said Faceless man. Then we all agree and The Rise of Dorne sugests a FM. But still even with a FM the problem isn't solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 So in other words, the worst that could happen is the same war which happened anyway because Jon, Ned and Robert rebelled? Pretty weak argument.So in other words, the worst that could happen is the same war which happened anyway because Jon, Ned and Robert rebelled? Pretty weak argument.If someone wants a war with you the best thing to do is go on the attack instead of waiting for it. If Aerys goes to war first (and murdering Rickard and asking for Robert's head WAS going to war) and arrives at Storm's End with his main force, the war is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 No. Aerys shouldn't get a pass. That's why god made assassins. Do you have anything to suggest that Ned or Robert actually knew anything about the FM? Or that it would have occurred to them if they did? Jon Arryn certainly didn't think of it and he was the guy who initially called his banners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingelheim Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Well, if the woman I love has been kidnapped, and the father and the brother of my best friend have been tortured to death...I think it's justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 What exactly do you base this claim on? We haven't had a PoV from any non-Stark Northerner, and IIRC we don't even have any statements about this rebellion from Northerners outside the highest ranked nobles.Jorah was a Northerner and he said in no uncertain terms that the smallfolk want to be left alone and not to be in involved in the political games and wars of the nobles.War is terrible, but young men often idealize it and want to go. Also, look at the fact that these men willingly march through miles of snow just to save Ned's daughter. If you really think the Northern smallfolk weren't loyal to the Starks, I don't know what to tell you.You are also basing your entire argument on one line from Jorah Mormont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rise of Dorne Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 what?!!!in a Feudal system , high lords like Ned and Robert are considered to be something like the kings of their region , yes that is why they call it seven kingdoms . so , those peasants are(should be) loyal to their lords (Ned and Robert) not the king (mad king). their lords demanded their service and they obeyed.I really don't see a big dead here , peasants have died for lesser things , why not die protecting their lords.Why should they die for Ned and Robert? Just because someone else died before? That's not a reason. I'm just saying war is just as immoral for Ned and Rebert as it is for Balon and Tywin. There's no difference when you're talking about killing thousands of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Why should they die for Ned and Robert? Just because someone else died before? That's not a reason. I'm just saying war is just as immoral for Ned and Rebert as it is for Balon and Tywin. There's no difference when you're talking about killing thousands of people."war is bad, so everyone who ever fought a war ever is bad" is pretty much the worst argument you could make. We're talking about ASOIAF here. Save it for the drum circle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Sansa Stark Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 I like how David Selig always plays the devil's advocate in threads as these. Makes you think of other options and lets you see another viewpoint. Fair enough, he brings up some good arguments.Still, in my opinion, the Rebellion was justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rise of Dorne Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Then we all agree and The Rise of Dorne sugests a FM. But still even with a FM the problem isn't solved.A facelesss man solves the problem just as much a rebellion. Its not like they were guaranteed to win. They could have stayed in the Eryie and sent out ravens. They've got several years worth of food up there. Or they could have gone to Braavos themselves and kept running from their. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenlyIsNotRight Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 So the basic jist I'm getting from some of the posters here is "Aerys didn't need to be deposed because he was murdering nobles, not smallfolk"...really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAndFullOfTurnips Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Why should they die for Ned and Robert? Just because someone else died before? That's not a reason. I'm just saying war is just as immoral for Ned and Rebert as it is for Balon and Tywin. There's no difference when you're talking about killing thousands of people.There's actually a huge difference when killing thousands of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 Just wondering if the same love and care that people shows for the smallfolks during RR feel the same about those who died in and Field of Fire and in War of Conquest generally... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Not to be provocative, but I have a hard time thinking that it really matters whether the Rebellion was justified. It seems to me the more important thing is that it was inevitable. There's no practical way it could have been avoided, so far as I can see (assuming for the moment that neither Ned, nor Robert, was ever going to order an assassination). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Sansa Stark Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 So the basic jist I'm getting from some of the posters here is "Aerys didn't need to be deposed because he was murdering nobles, not smallfolk"...really?No, they mean that the Rebellion was not justified, since it implies that Jon, Robert and Ned threw thousands of people into a war, which could have been prevented if they just went to Essos or something like it. They say it is unfair to throw thousands of people into a war, even if it means that you will be killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rise of Dorne Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 "war is bad, so everyone who ever fought a war ever is bad"; is pretty much the worst argument you could make. We're talking about ASOIAF here. Save it for the drum circle.Did I say that? I just said Ned and Robert were as justified as Balon and Tywin. Killing thousands of people is killing thousands of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Sansa Stark Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Just wondering if the same love and care that people shows for the smallfolks during RR feel the same about those who died in and Field of Fire and in War of Conquest generally...Well, I think most people will feel the same as they do here, though some people are convinced that the War of Conquest was justified because the Seven Kingdoms are now one Kingdom and because, dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W.Kane Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Why should they die for Ned and Robert? Just because someone else died before? That's not a reason. I'm just saying war is just as immoral for Ned and Rebert as it is for Balon and Tywin. There's no difference when you're talking about killing thousands of people.because Ned and Robert are their Lords . they died protecting their lords . no it is not immoral , they(Robert and Ned) didn't go to war with the mad king , the war forced on them , they had no choice. of course there is a difference . what they demanded form their men were just and right , but what balon and twyin demanded were self serving and unlawful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuisDantas Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 If you subscribe to the Southron Ambitions school of thought the Great Lords were already moving to remove Aerys with a great council and replace him with Rhaegar. That's why Rhaegar told Jamie changes were in the offing when he returned from the trident. I'm sure I would have rebelled too, but there's nothing moral about it. There are certainly more moral ways to deal with it. Ned could have gone beyond the wall, Robert could have joined a sell sword company.Uh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rise of Dorne Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 There's actually a huge difference when killing thousands of people.No there's not. Not when you're ordering them into battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.