Aes Sedai Bonded!

[randsc]

So you preferred that the AS be just slaughtered?...self defense with use of deadly force is no crime in most civilized places when your life is at stake.

No. But that's not my point - I meant that just because it's self-defence doesn't give someone the right to enslave his attacker.

 

Compulsion type slavery through the bond and killing weren't the only options, BTW.

 

The only true option was to slaughter the invading AS...no crime in any civilized nation.

 

That they were bonded and spared their lives was a mercy given to the AS by the DR, something the high and mighty AS cannot comprehend in their supreme arrogance.

 

The taint was still present, no one at that point had any idea that the DR would perform a miracle. Even though Elaida is a complete idiot the Red's were merely doing their job. They saved and protected the world from murderous madmen for three thousand years but now all of a sudden they are some invading force that deserves to be slaughtered or enslaved? It would be like police showing up to arrest a psychotic madman and you saying he has every right to kill them.

 

You know better.

 

It is not the job of the Reds to kill without trial, to say nothing of killing people who might be nothing more than bystanders or servants. They have no mandate to do so. Your analogy is seriously flawed.

 

A better analogy for what the Reds planned (and not just the Reds) is this: It would be like the police showing up to arrest a psychotic madman, and KILLING everyone present who MIGHT be a psychotic madman.

 

And, by the way, even in our culture, even psychotic madmen have the right to employ deadly force in self-defense.

 

The Aes Sedai should have been killed. I won't join the chorus of those saying the forced bonding was the lesser evil, because I think magically-enforced compulsion might be the greater evil.

[randsc]

Here's the thing: forcibly bonding someone is nasty--especially for the room it leaves for abuse. For all that, it was probably the best option the Asha'man had--the only practical alternative being to kill the Aes Sedai, a fact Egwene acknowledges when she herself orders the execution of the Black sisters--that many sisters are too dangerous to be kept prisoner--and to date the bond has not been abused, which is mitigating, as is the fact that the Aes Sedai were the agressors.

 

But for all that I do understand the Aes Sedai's position. When something which has the potential to be horribly abused is used on your sister by a man you have had three thousand years of reasons to reguard as a monster, its pretty upsetting. This response is not rational, its emotional, but for all that, understandable.

 

I think this is basically the best overall summation on this thread.

 

I do note that the bolded part says something rather awful about the AS as a group, but will leave it at that.

[damandred]

So you preferred that the AS be just slaughtered?...self defense with use of deadly force is no crime in most civilized places when your life is at stake.

No. But that's not my point - I meant that just because it's self-defence doesn't give someone the right to enslave his attacker.

 

Compulsion type slavery through the bond and killing weren't the only options, BTW.

 

The only true option was to slaughter the invading AS...no crime in any civilized nation.

 

That they were bonded and spared their lives was a mercy given to the AS by the DR, something the high and mighty AS cannot comprehend in their supreme arrogance.

 

The taint was still present, no one at that point had any idea that the DR would perform a miracle. Even though Elaida is a complete idiot the Red's were merely doing their job. They saved and protected the world from murderous madmen for three thousand years but now all of a sudden they are some invading force that deserves to be slaughtered or enslaved? It would be like police showing up to arrest a psychotic madman and you saying he has every right to kill them.

 

 

Yes but what if the psychotic mad man was given a court order which pardened him. The Asha'man had every right to defend themselves they were given their mandate by the DR a power seen as above everyone even the WT. the Asha'man would be well with in their rights to kill every AS as enermys of their leader as past events had proved and even as agents of the shadow as can be argued about anyone who uses force against the DR.

[Xcorpyo001]

The AS that were bonded against their will are not mistreated, they just have to not kill Ashaman and leave the grounds.

Some AS are really enjoying the experience, and others have enough freedom to plan an escape or how to reverse the situation.

 

Even the AS use a small level of Compulsion with their Warders, because they can 'tweak' the bond so the Warder are forced to obey their commands(Lan is a good example here).

 

The Sitters, especially Romanda, Lelaine&co, that never agreed on anything while in Salidar, all agree that using a bond with a high degree of Compulsion is perfectly understandable, and they have to be the ones in control. Egwene agrees with the idea of control, but not by Compulsion.

 

The Ashaman are the only one so far to use the Warder bond without the Compulsion tweak, like Grady and the married ones did with their wives, so the women can feel that they are OK and still alive, and send their feeling through the bond.

This is the only instance in which the bond is used in a good way, without any degree of Compulsion.

 

The Warder bond between AS and Warders has a small amount of control/Compulsion, and the bond between AM and AS a higher one. But neither have been misused very often.

[GYLD]

They went to the BT to kill all the Asha'man, servants, wives, children, etc.

 

Elaida's direct command was to take the non Asha'man alive.

 

That is not true. All men were to be killed, Asha'man or not.

 

Yes, you appear to be correct. I went back and looked at the quote and it looks like I must have misinterpreted it.

 

From the ACOS prologue:

 

"Toveine is to lead fifty sisters and two hundred of the Tower Guards, where they will gentle any man they find able to channel and hang him, along with as many others as they can take alive."

 

It does sound like she ordered any non channelers not outright killed in the attack to be hanged.

[Xcorpyo001]

They went to the BT to kill all the Asha'man, servants, wives, children, etc.

 

Elaida's direct command was to take the non Asha'man alive.

 

That is not true. All men were to be killed, Asha'man or not.

 

Yes, you appear to be correct. I went back and looked at the quote and it looks like I must have misinterpreted it.

 

From the ACOS prologue:

 

"Toveine is to lead fifty sisters and two hundred of the Tower Guards, where they will gentle any man they find able to channel and hang him, along with as many others as they can take alive."

 

It does sound like she ordered any non channelers not outright killed in the attack to be hanged.

 

 

Yep, you are right.

Hang the stilled ones and everybody else they capture alive.

Once he is stilled, a channeler becomes just another person, one that will not go insane because the taint is gone.

So she is killing innocent civilians, even if she limits herself to channelers, although I don't think she would have done that.

[randsc]

People should not, in their zeal to defend Egwene, attempt to justify an act by Elaida that Egwene herself believed to be not only heinous, but also criminal.

 

This is actually to Egwene's credit (though her difficulty in accepting responsibility, as the current Amyrlin, is disappointing.)

[Xcorpyo001]

People should not, in their zeal to defend Egwene, attempt to justify an act by Elaida that Egwene herself believed to be not only heinous, but also criminal.

 

This is actually to Egwene's credit (though her difficulty in accepting responsibility, as the current Amyrlin, is disappointing.)

 

 

Can you give a quote for those instances?!?

 

"And why was an Asha'man in the camp?" Egwene asked coolly.

"He'd been sent as an envoy," Siuan explained. "From the Dragon Reborn. Mother, it appears some of the men who follow

al'Thor have bonded Aes Sedai."

Egwene blinked a single time. "Yes. I had heard rumors of this. I had hoped that they were exaggerated. Did this Asha'man say

who gave Rand permission to commit such an atrocity?"

 

This is how she sees the bonding, but I can't remember what she thinks about Elaida's orders, other that they were a disaster for the WT.

[Suttree]

People should not, in their zeal to defend Egwene, attempt to justify an act by Elaida that Egwene herself believed to be not only heinous, but also criminal.

 

This is actually to Egwene's credit (though her difficulty in accepting responsibility, as the current Amyrlin, is disappointing.)

 

No one is attempting to justify the act. In this thread I am on record as saying Elaida is a an idiot and her order was wrong.

 

As for the Red's carrying it out however you can't apply western laws to the situation. Right or wrong we know things like the vileness have taken place throughout the WT history. If they had decided to just kill one of the false dragons in history as opposed to gentling him I don't think the parts of the world he had destroyed would be all that upset. Different times call for different measures. With TG approaching you can see how Red's would rather not have insane channelers to deal with as well. Does it make it right? NO. But you can't look at through our perspective, given the history of the world it makes sense that some Red's would have seen this as their duty.

 

Someone else mentioned Rand's protection which really means nothing in this instance. They were still men destined to go mad.

 

If police are sent to kill a potential psychotic madman who has committed no crimes and was minding his own business in his house..then he is well within his right to react with deadly force to save his life anywhere in the civilized world.

 

There is no potential in this as you know so don't be disingenuous. For three thousand years it was 100% going to be a psychotic madman. Unless everyone in world as of tPoD was sure the DR could clean Saidin your point is meaningless.

[randsc]

The options are not, as you know well, KILL any male channeler or let him run free. He could be gentled, as in fact he should be under Tower law. The Reds have no justification, under IN-WORLD law and ethics, for killing the Asha'man. To say nothing of "as many others as they can take alive."

 

Which means, unless you consider the Nuremburg defense to be valid, that the Reds (and others) bonded by the Asha'man are not deserving of pity. They are criminals, and their deaths would be justice. "I'm just following (Elaida's) orders" doesn't cut it.

[Suttree]

The options are not, as you know well, KILL any male channeler or let him run free. He could be gentled, as in fact he should be under Tower law. The Reds have no justification, under IN-WORLD law and ethics, for killing the Asha'man. To say nothing of "as many others as they can take alive."

 

Which means, unless you consider the Nuremburg defense to be valid, that the Reds (and others) bonded by the Asha'man are not deserving of pity. They are criminals, and their deaths would be justice. "I'm just following (Elaida's) orders" doesn't cut it.

 

Right which is why Elaida is an idiot and the order was wrong.

 

Again they were ordered by the Armylin to still and hang a large group of male channelers, that would someday be a huge threat to the world. When looked at from the framework of the story(Red's are frequently overzealous in carrying out their duty) you can see how some would think they were doing their job. There were non BA involved in the vileness which probably thought the same.

[randsc]

The options are not, as you know well, KILL any male channeler or let him run free. He could be gentled, as in fact he should be under Tower law. The Reds have no justification, under IN-WORLD law and ethics, for killing the Asha'man. To say nothing of "as many others as they can take alive."

 

Which means, unless you consider the Nuremburg defense to be valid, that the Reds (and others) bonded by the Asha'man are not deserving of pity. They are criminals, and their deaths would be justice. "I'm just following (Elaida's) orders" doesn't cut it.

 

Right which is why Elaida is an idiot and the order was wrong.

 

Again they were ordered by the Armylin to still and hang a large group of male channelers, that would someday be a huge threat to the world. When looked at from the framework of the story(Red's are frequently overzealous in carrying out their duty) you can see how some would think they were doing their job. There were non BA involved in the vileness which probably thought the same.

 

It is why the order was wrong, AND why attempting to carry out the order was wrong. Making those who attempted to carry out the order criminals. Making the use of deadly force against them justified, in their world or ours.

 

There's an expression that is on point: "Bad Elk is good law."

 

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/John_Bad_Elk_v._United_States/Opinion_of_the_Court

 

And again, no matter how you want to spin it, their apparent willingness to hang people who have NEVER been able to channel ought to trouble you.

[Suttree]

And again, no matter how you want to spin it, their apparent willingness to hang people who have NEVER been able to channel ought to trouble you.

 

You know me Randsc, I'm all for the wholesale slaughter of innocents. Doesn't trouble me in the slightest...and that of course was the point I was making.

[randsc]

Then why persist in pretending that the actions of the Reds were in any way justified, or in denying that the actions of the Asha'man were justified?

 

This statement you made earlier: "the Red's were in someways doing their duty" is untrue. Under IN-WORLD laws and customs. A police officer who shoots anyone acting strangely, on the the grounds that crazy people sometimes kill other people, is in no way "doing his duty." He is doing the opposite.

 

The Aes Sedai strike force was attempting murder. Their deaths would have been entirely justified, and Egwene has no grounds to demand their release, unless it is to face trial for attempted murder (or murder, if anyone died in the initial attack.)

[Suttree]

Then why persist in pretending that the actions of the Reds were in any way justified, or in denying that the actions of the Asha'man were justified?

 

This statement: "the Red's were in someways doing their duty." Is untrue. Under IN-WORLD laws and customs.

 

The Ahsaman were justified in adding that bit to the bond that turns people into slaves? They couldn't have just done it the normal way?

 

As for in-world laws and customs, as you know they change with the times. What was okay during the Breaking is frowned upon now. My point, is it the first or last time Red's have stilled and hanged men without bringing them to the WT first? I doubt it and with TG on the doorstep, who knows what they think they are right in doing to a group that is growing larger by the day and will some day pose an enormous threat to the world. So yes, in "someways" they thought they were doing their duty.

[randsc]

Then why persist in pretending that the actions of the Reds were in any way justified, or in denying that the actions of the Asha'man were justified?

 

This statement: "the Red's were in someways doing their duty." Is untrue. Under IN-WORLD laws and customs.

 

The Ahsaman were justified in adding that bit to the bond that requires obedience? They couldn't have just done it the normal way?

 

As for in-world laws and customs, as you know they change with the times. What was okay during the Breaking is frowned upon now. My point, is it the first or last time Red's have stilled and hanged men without bringing them to the WT first? I doubt it and with TG on the doorstep, who knows what they think they are right in doing to a group that is growing larger by the day and will some day pose an enormous threat to the world. So yes, in "someways" they thought they were doing their duty.

 

They added nothing. Re-read the text. AS can compel obedience from their Warders. The "extra bit" refers to something else entirely.

 

As it happens, I don't think any person, Asha'man or AS, is justified in compelling by magical means the obedience of any other person. I do think the Asha'man would have been justifed in killing the Aes Sedai instead of capturing them. Or in putting them on trial and then hanging them as murderers.

 

EDIT: Ah, I see by your edit you figured out the problem with your argument. Of course, the Asha'man did not make the Aes Sedai slaves; they just forbade them from harming Asha'man or escaping. What Egwene did to several of her "sisters" comes far closer to slavery.

[Suttree]

EDIT: Ah, I see by your edit you figured out the problem with your argument.

 

? I corrected a typo...

 

As for the extra bit..

Bela the Horse from Tel'aran'rhiod: What was the "extra bit" in The Path of Daggers? Was it the kiss or the bonding? Please help settle this long-standing dispute.

RJ: The kiss is necessary, because that's how they learned to do it, because that's how the fellow that developed it did it. The extra bit is something in the bonding, and you'll find out what in Winter's Heart. You should have gotten a clue, I think, in the scene where the bonding took place.

 

Crossroads of Twilight book tour 28 January 2003 - Edmonton, Alberta

 

Q: Is it possible for an Aes Sedai to bond someone Asha'man style?

RJ: Yes, if they learned the weaves. The Asha'man know a lot more about bonding than the Aes Sedai. Some guy figured out how to bond their wives, and then they started concentrating on other things they could do with the bond. The Aes Sedai never experimented, just passed on what they knew.

 

The extra bit is the compulsion and per RJ it is diff.

[randsc]

No, you changed "obedience" to "slavery."

 

In Winter's Heart, we see the sexual aspect to the bond. That is the only difference. You cannot seriously be disputing that the AS can compel obedience from their Warders?

 

And again, I don't think the Aes Sedai should have been bonded. But what happens to them is no worse than what happened to Rand. In fact, what happened to Rand is far, far worse.

[Suttree]

No, you changed "obedience" to "slavery."

 

In Winter's Heart, we see the sexual aspect to the bond. That is the only difference. You cannot seriously be disputing that the AS can compel obedience from their Warders?

 

And again, I don't think the Aes Sedai should have been bonded. But what happens to them is no worse than what happened to Rand. In fact, what happened to Rand is far, far worse.

 

OOKKK so insignificant I didn't even remember. Two words for a similar thing innit? One I'll grant you has a stronger connotation. The AS can compel(we have seen it used once? by Myrelle in saving Lan), but the Ashaman bond has been shown to be far stronger and used much more frequently in that respect.

 

Interesting about the "extra bit", I had never read it that way if it is indeed the case. IIRC we do see the obedience aspect reflected on in WH too so I always assumed that's what it meant. Either way per RJ they are different bonds and the second quote isn't referring to the sexual aspect I don't think.

 

Agreed on Rand.

[randsc]

A difference so insignificant that you felt the need to go back and edit your post to reflect it. Are you sure you didn't read what you originally wrote, say to yourself, "oops, the AS can compel obedience, too" and "fix" it?

 

I'll grant you that the compulsion is actually used more by the Asha'man. But only because they didn't do what Aes Sedai do in similar circumstances: kill or gentle the dangerous individuals.

 

The AS should have been killed immediately. Barring that, they should have been shielded and placed on trial, and then executed. Barring THAT, they should have been stilled and left to make their way in the world, as AS do to men. Barring THAT...I don't see the Asha'mans actions as either unreasonable or unjustified.

[Suttree]

A difference so insignificant that you felt the need to go back and edit your post to reflect it. Are you sure you didn't read what you originally wrote, say to yourself, "oops, the AS can compel obedience, too" and "fix" it?

 

Think you know me well enough by now to understand I have no problem laughing and saying you got me if that had been the case. Scouts honor.

 

Back to the original point, when something like this which has a huge potential for abuse is used by someone you have feared for three thousand years I think the response is natural.

 

Well Randsc, it was a pleasure...it's been too long since we have gone a few rounds. I tip my cap as always.

[MasterAblar]

 

No one is attempting to justify the act. In this thread I am on record as saying Elaida is a an idiot and her order was wrong.

 

As for the Red's carrying it out however you can't apply western laws to the situation. Right or wrong we know things like the vileness have taken place throughout the WT history. If they had decided to just kill one of the false dragons in history as opposed to gentling him I don't think the parts of the world he had destroyed would be all that upset. Different times call for different measures. With TG approaching you can see how Red's would rather not have insane channelers to deal with as well. Does it make it right? NO. But you can't look at through our perspective, given the history of the world it makes sense that some Red's would have seen this as their duty.

 

Someone else mentioned Rand's protection which really means nothing in this instance. They were still men destined to go mad.

 

You say that Rand doesn't matter in this, but I have to admit I don't agree with that. Why do the Aes Sedai have the decision making power over what should happen to male channelers? For 3000 years (more or less), they haven't met any resistance from the rulers of other nations on this subject, because those rulers were all for their method. Rand, however clearly opposes it. And he has formed, under his authority, an organisation of male channelers? Now, why should the Aes Sedai have the power to decide what to do with those male channellers, instead of Rand? What gives them the right to decide what happens in his territory, where he has power, and where he certainly does not recognise the right of the Aes Sedai to deal with male channellers as they please?

 

Look at it this way: if this group of male channellers were under the authority of the Aiel, or the Sea Folk, would it be right of the Aes Sedai to deal with them as they please? Of course not, because they do not have authority and powers of decision over either of these two groups. The nations of Randland do not oppose the Aes Sedai because they agree with them. However even if they did not agree with the Aes Sedai's methods, they would be quite powerless to oppose them. This however, is not the case with Rand. He definitely has the power to oppose them. And the whole problem is that the Aes Sedai have not recognised that. They have not recognised that Rand has sufficient power and authority and influence to dissagree with them. If he was just some peasant who had none of those then it wouldn't have been an issue. But Rand has them, and more than that, the fact that he is a channeller as well means that his views on this subject are just as valid.

 

If the Aes Sedai disagree with his decision then they have two options: force or negociations. The first means war, or it would if Rand wasn't desperately trying to look at the bigger picture and put his own personal grudges aside. The second option is the one they should have taken. They should have spoken with Rand about it and tried to convince him that he was wrong on this point. But instead of that, they decided without any provocation, to summarly gentle and hang any MAN, not just Ashaman, found at the BT. That could have very dire consequences.

 

In short, my point is that the Aes Sedai were not justfied in what they did, simply because Rand did not recognise their authority on the matter and had enout power to back it up and put the whole question of "what to do with male channellers" back up in contention, and therefore put on hold any decision to gentle the Ashaman. But expecting the rather not so humble Aes Sedai to recognise this would be rather naive.

 

The options are not, as you know well, KILL any male channeler or let him run free. He could be gentled, as in fact he should be under Tower law. The Reds have no justification, under IN-WORLD law and ethics, for killing the Asha'man. To say nothing of "as many others as they can take alive."

 

Which means, unless you consider the Nuremburg defense to be valid, that the Reds (and others) bonded by the Asha'man are not deserving of pity. They are criminals, and their deaths would be justice. "I'm just following (Elaida's) orders" doesn't cut it.

 

Right which is why Elaida is an idiot and the order was wrong.

 

Again they were ordered by the Armylin to still and hang a large group of male channelers, that would someday be a huge threat to the world. When looked at from the framework of the story(Red's are frequently overzealous in carrying out their duty) you can see how some would think they were doing their job. There were non BA involved in the vileness which probably thought the same.

 

Personally, I think that the Aes Sedai all have brains and should therefore use them. If the order they are given is unlawful then they shouldn't just meekly follow it. The fact that they may be blinded by 3000 years of hate and so on and so forth does not excuse them. It helps understand why they would think what they doing is right, but it still doesn't excuse them, especially when what they were going to do is so clearly EVIL.

 

That said, what would excuse them is if they had no knowledge of precisely what they were ordered to do. I may be wrong but I don't believe anyone other than Toveine (who we already knew had big issues telling wrong and right apart) knew exactly what they were ordered to do. They knew they were going after the Ashaman, but I don't know if they knew what they were doing was unlawful. Gabrelle didn't seem to know.

 

Then why persist in pretending that the actions of the Reds were in any way justified, or in denying that the actions of the Asha'man were justified?

 

This statement: "the Red's were in someways doing their duty." Is untrue. Under IN-WORLD laws and customs.

 

The Ahsaman were justified in adding that bit to the bond that turns people into slaves? They couldn't have just done it the normal way?

 

As for in-world laws and customs, as you know they change with the times. What was okay during the Breaking is frowned upon now. My point, is it the first or last time Red's have stilled and hanged men without bringing them to the WT first? I doubt it and with TG on the doorstep, who knows what they think they are right in doing to a group that is growing larger by the day and will some day pose an enormous threat to the world. So yes, in "someways" they thought they were doing their duty.

 

I don't understand. What would have been the point of a bond without the extra bit. I don't think either of the two parties care to share each others feelings. The whole point was clearly to control the Aes Sedai and stop them form harming the BT.

 

Now about the bonding. I can't say I like it, and gaining control (complete control) over someone else against their will is clearly evil in my opinion. However, the fact is that it was the only plausible solution to the issue at hand. What other options did they have? Killing them? It would have been justfied, but it probably would have resulted in a full blown war between the WT and Rand, which is out of the question. Sending them back to the WT? It's just not possible to expect the Ashaman to do that. Those Aes Sedai came there to attack them, to gentle them, and to kill them. The Ashaman can't be expected to simply send the Aes Sedai back to the WT as if it was no problem at all. Not to mention it quite probably would prompt Elaida to send an even greater party against the BT. Just look at how she reacted when she learned of Dumai's Wells. The only other option would be to have them shielded 24/7, which would require a very great number of Ashaman. It would be utterly impractical. No, the bondind was the only plausible solution. Thankfully it seems that the Ashaman are not abusing the bond, which is something I doubt Logain would stand for, and only stop them from harming the BT until a real solution can be found.

 

Does any of this make the bonding any less evil. No, it was small evil the commited, but it was commited to avert a catastrophe, though Egwene doesn't seem to have realised that, and ultimately the real person that is to blame for the whole thing is, of course, Elaida. As usual.

[Suttree]

You say that Rand doesn't matter in this, but I have to admit I don't agree with that. Why do the Aes Sedai have the decision making power over what should happen to male channelers? For 3000 years (more or less), they haven't met any resistance from the rulers of other nations on this subject, because those rulers were all for their method. Rand, however clearly opposes it. And he has formed, under his authority, an organisation of male channelers? Now, why should the Aes Sedai have the power to decide what to do with those male channellers, instead of Rand? What gives them the right to decide what happens in his territory, where he has power, and where he certainly does not recognise the right of the Aes Sedai to deal with male channellers as they please?

 

So the fact that AS saved the world from this threat during the breaking and protected Randland for 3000 years gains them no leeway in the matter? The fact that they are the only group that steps up to deal with it all those years gives them the right to make the decision of how male channelers were to be dealt with. There was no one else to do that very difficult job.

 

 

The reason Rand doesn't factor in is because when he made the decision no one had any idea he could cleanse the taint. In my mind the most negligent thing Rand has done is create a living timebomb and walk away from it with zero oversight so it can become the major power for the Shadow it has.

 

Also since when is Andor Rand's territory?

 

Edit: When you start taking about "right" it's a tricky thing. TG is coming and many difficult decisions need to be made, not all of them will be correct. If someone like Rand thinks he has the "right" to slaughter hundreds of innocents at Natrim's Barrow to take out a forsaken, you can see how some overzealous Red's thought it was their duty to follow through on this order.

[XXX]

 

So the fact that AS saved the world from this threat during the breaking and protected Randland for 3000 years gains them no leeway in the matter? The fact that they are the only group that steps up to deal with it all those years gives them the right to make the decision of how male channelers were to be dealt with. There was no one else to do that very difficult job.

 

 

Emphasis being on "was", the days of them being the predominant authority in Randland ended the second the DR picked up callandor.

 

Something they still have difficulty comprehending thought the current Amyrlin does recognize the fact to her chagrin.

 

 

The reason Rand doesn't factor in is because when he made the decision no one had any idea he could cleanse the taint. In my mind the most negligent thing Rand has done is create a living timebomb and walk away from it with zero oversight so it can become the major power for the Shadow it has.

 

 

Hundreds of Asha'man has fought the shadow for Rand and have helped his defense against the Seachan..a lot more help than what the WT was willing to give him.

[Kahsm]

Rand knows what the Reds do. If he wants to protect them, then he has to protect them, either by keeping his people away from Aes Sedai, fighting some perpetual war, or (and possibly the best solution) negotiating with the WT to cease the practice. If he just lets the BT sit there while the WT goes after them, there's no way that's the WT's fault...

 

"I DECLARE AN AMNESTY. Alright, now that I've made you all targets, you're on your own. Good Luck."