I'm sick of the argument that "alicent was just scared for her children's lives!"
No. That argument does not track, because if she truly was so afraid, she'd have done everything in her power to have Rhaenyra be as close as possible to her children. She would have fought tooth and nail to have all five siblings be best fucking friends and love one another. But she didn't. She made them enemies by fearmongering and insisting to her sons that Rhaenyra would kill them when there was zero evidence she would.
You don't placate an "enemy" by making them hate you - by usurping their lawful birthright - you placate them by not being seen as a threat.
There is no evidence Rhaenyra wanted her half-siblings harmed, and in the books she insists she'll take them back into her heart if they bent the knee, but they were so twisted by Alicent and Otto's and their own greed for power that they were raised to hate her because Alicent and Otto filled their heads with the lie that Rhaenyra stole their birthright.
Rhaenyra didn't steal anything. Viserys, the King, named her his lawful heir and successor. The greens usurped the lawful heir, and Rhaenyra fought back only after she lost her daughter and her son to the greens; she, at first, wished to fight diplomatically. The greens drew first blood.
Rhaenyra would never have had to harm her half-siblings if they knelt and allowed her to ascend the throne bloodlessly. They didn't. And don't start by stating " but the lords would have risen in revolt!" Possibly, yes, but if the lords revolted and wanted Aegon on the throne, and Aegon had knelt and proclaimed Rhaenyra his lawful queen and refused to be their puppet, he'd be innocent and the rebel lords would be punished for treason.
Rhaenyra could have given her brothers places at court, or even married them to her supporters. But she wasn't given a chance to do that, because Alicent and Otto forced Aegon to usurp her, and then he tasted kingly power and wanted Rhaenyra and her family dead.
Also, before you come at me saying that Rhaenyra, in the show and book, wanted Aemond "sharply questioned", to try and "prove" she'd have killed her brothers, and think she means tortute, thats incorrect. That isn't what that means. It means aggressively questioned. Abruptly. Intensely. Not tortured.
"He should be sharply questioned" means "he should be intensely questioned with verbal force as to where he heard the rumor my sons are bastards" AKA Viserys should have pulled rank as King to demand the truth as to where Aemond heard such treason and thought he could spew it himself.
"Aggressively" also doesn't mean physically so, but rather this:
Example: how Dumbledore asks Harry if he put his name in the Goblet of Fire in the movie. That's questioned sharply.
