Stannis is the One True King

[Knight errant]

I read the book where he burnt the seven at both Dragon stone and Stormsend, and where he burnt peices of weirwood at the wall. which book are you reading?

Just because other people use underhand tactics deosn't justify him for doing so.

Craven for not meeting Renly in battle but assasinating him before hand. which was to his knowledge.

He chopped of Davos's fingers when he just saved his ass from starving, I understand why he did this but it just comes across as a dick move to me.

that doesn't mean he's anti religious, he burned two "False religions" to accept the title of AA. I see your point but disagree. He needed them to burn the weirwood as a sign they are giving up their free folk raiding ways for his. Moreoever if he's against the old god why is he going to sacrifice Theon to them?

No. That's stupid "Underhanded tactics". Everyone uses them in this series, even Robb doesn't fight "Fair" and just charge into insanely uneven odds, it's called warfare mate.

Craven for not meeting Renly in battle? 30K plus knights and horsemen against at best 5k ? How is that craven, those odds are suicidal and he needs all the men he can get, better one traitor, usurper, dies than all of them.

He cuts off his fingers then makes him a knight and eventually closet friend and adviser and hand and Lord. Hardly unfair in that context, is it?

[Guardian of the Lhazareen]

that doesn't mean he's anti religious, he burned two "False religions" to accept the title of AA. I see your point but disagree. He needed them to burn the weirwood as a sign they are giving up their free folk raiding ways for his. Moreoever if he's against the old god why is he going to sacrifice Theon to them?

No. That's stupid "Underhanded tactics". Everyone uses them in this series, even Robb doesn't fight "Fair" and just charge into insanely uneven odds, it's called warfare mate.

Craven for not meeting Renly in battle? 30K plus knights and horsemen against at best 5k ? How is that craven, those odds are suicidal and he needs all the men he can get, better one traitor, usurper, dies than all of them.

He cuts off his fingers then makes him a knight and eventually closet friend and adviser and hand and Lord. Hardly unfair in that context, is it?

I disagree, If i were to burn the Koran and the Bible that I would say that makes me anti religious, underhand tactics was actualy a reference to the assasination of courtney penrose. you have stated the reason behind Stannis's actions however that doesn't justify him for his crimes such as kinslaying and adultery. I recognise all the good he has done for davos but I just never got over how he choped of his fingers, can't you imagine davos's face when stannis is like thanks for saving me but now I must chop of your fingers!

[Knight errant]

So you're saying that Stannis did not carry out an obscure religious ritual by burning 4 people but rather he executed them for their crimes because he was "pushed to do [it] by his men" and there's nothing wrong w/ burning people alive. really?

Sorry but the burnings were obviously a religious ritual that is both foreign and obscure in the North. The Asha/Sacrifice chapter makes it abundantly clear. For example:

Six queen’s men were wrestling two enormous pinewood poles into holes six other queen’s men had dug out. Asha did not have to ask their purpose. She knew. Stakes. Nightfall would be on them soon, and the red god must be fed. An offering of blood and fire, the queen’s men called it, that the Lord of Light may turn his fiery eye upon us and melt these thrice-cursed snows.

...Peasebury’s four would pay for their feast with their lives, by the king’s decree ... and by burning end the storm, the queen’s men claimed. Asha Greyjoy put no faith in their red god, yet she prayed they had the right of that. If not, there would be other pyres, and Ser Clayton Suggs might get his heart’s desire....

...The four victims were chained up back-to-back, two to a stake. There they hung, three live men and one dead one, as the Lord of Light’s devout stacked split logs and broken branches under their feet, then doused the piles with lamp oil. ...

...So far as Asha knew, the gods of the Karstarks were the old gods of the north, gods they shared with the Wulls, the Norreys, the Flints, and the other hill clans. She wondered if Lord Arnolf had come to view the burning at the king’s behest, that he might witness the power of the red god for himself.

At the sight of Stannis, two of the men bound to the stakes began to plead for mercy. The king listened in silence, his jaw clenched. Then he said to Godry Farring, “You may begin.”

The Giantslayer raised his arms. “Lord of Light, hear us.”

“Lord of Light, defend us,” the queen’s men chanted, “for the night is dark and full of terrors.”

Ser Godry raised his head toward the darkening sky. “We thank you for the sun that warms us and pray that you will return it to us, Oh lord, that it might light our path to your enemies.” Snowflakes melted on his face. “We thank you for the stars that watch over us by night, and pray that you will rip away this veil that hides them, so we might glory in their sight once more.”

“Lord of Light, protect us,” the queen’s men prayed, “and keep this savage dark at bay.” Ser Corliss Penny stepped forward, clutching the torch with both hands. He swung it about his

head in a circle, fanning the flames. One of the captives began to whimper.

“R’hllor,” Ser Godry sang, “we give you now four evil men. With glad hearts and true, we give them to your cleansing fires, that the darkness in their souls might be burned away. Let their vile flesh be seared and blackened, that their spirits might rise free and pure to ascend into the light. Accept their blood, Oh lord, and melt the icy chains that bind your servants. Hear their pain, and grant strength to our swords that we might shed the blood of your enemies. Accept this sacrifice, and show us the way to Winterfell, that we might vanquish the unbelievers.”

“Lord of Light, accept this sacrifice,” a hundred voices echoed. Ser Corliss lit the first pyre with the torch, then thrust it into the wood at the base of the second. A few wisps of smoke began to rise. The captives began to cough. The first flames appeared, shy as maidens, darting and dancing from log to leg. In moments both the stakes were engulfed in fire.

“He was dead,” the weeping boy screamed, as the flames licked up his legs. “We found him dead ... please ... we was hungry ...” The fires reached his balls. As the hair around his cock began to burn, his pleading dissolved into one long wordless shriek....

Culturally the North finds burning people alive as a form of capital punishment to be abhorrent. It's clear the Mnt Clans and Aly Mormont find the practice appalling.

“Even in this place of fear and darkness, the Lord of Light protects us,” Ser Godry Farring told the men who gathered to watch as the stakes were hammered down into the holes.

“What has your southron god to do with snow?” demanded Artos Flint. His black beard was crusted with ice. “This is the wroth of the old gods come upon us. It is them we should appease.”

“Aye,” said Big Bucket Wull. “Red Rahloo means nothing here. You will only make the old gods angry. They are watching from their island.”

The crofter’s village stood between two lakes, the larger dotted with small wooded islands that punched up through the ice like the frozen fists of some drowned giant. From one such island rose a weirwood gnarled and ancient, its bole and branches white as the surrounding snows. Eight days ago Asha had walked out with Aly Mormont to have a closer look at its slitted red eyes and bloody mouth. It is only sap, she’d told herself, the red sap that flows inside these weirwoods. But her eyes were unconvinced; seeing was believing, and what they saw was frozen blood.

“You northmen brought these snows upon us,” insisted Corliss Penny. “You and your demon trees. R’hllor will save us.”

“R’hllor will doom us,” said Artos Flint.

Asha is also disgusted by the spectacle.

Asha Greyjoy could taste the bile in the back of her throat. On the Iron Islands, she had seen priests of her own people slit the throats of thralls and give their bodies to the sea to honor the Drowned God. Brutal as that was, this was worse.

Close your eyes, she told herself. Close your ears. Turn away. You do not need to see this. The queen’s men were singing some paean of praise for red R’hllor, but she could not hear the words above the shrieks. The heat of the flames beat against her face, but even so she shivered. The air grew thick with smoke and the stink of burnt flesh, and one of the bodies still twitched against the red-hot chains that bound him to the stake.

The only people the burnings appeased were the Queen's Men, because it was a religious ritual. It was meant to end the snowstorm. It was accompanied by a prayer to the Lord of Light. It was an obscure Religious ritual, foreign to the North, and associated w/ a hostile foreign god attacking the olds gods and the olds ways of the North.

There's nothing wrong w/ burning people, who out of desperation, resort to cannibalism, really?

So do you think the Uruguayan Rugby Team that crashed in the Andes in the 1970s and resorted cannibalism should have been burned alive (http://en.wikipedia....flight_disaster)? Stannis's Lords are eating well enough (aly willingly chose to forego a meal, and asha harldy ate more than few bites, same for Justin Massey) but the common folk are starving to death and those who try to survive, as Stannis would (remember the siege of Strom's End), are being burned alive in obscure religious rituals to appease a God that most people doubt he even believes in. Is that the King's Justice under Stannis? Is that leadership? Is that how he will rule the realm? And people wonder why he’s the least popular of all the claimants.

Not all of this happened in ADwD and probably needs a spoiler in the ADwD forum. And none of this has been confirmed. He said he wanted to lead the attack. He's probably seen men die by the start of TWoW, but not at the end of ADwD. Who are these men he's seen die for him and the realm? Where or when did he prove he was "cool headed"? JonCon and Tyrion both indicate he's rash like when he kicked cyvasse board, or by demanding to lead the attack on Strom's End. Neither of the 2 PoV that have given us insight into Aegon's personality have indicated he's cool headed. How is living on a pole boat w/ a measter and septa an exiled lord who lost his only major battle (how's that for tactics) and learning arms from Duck someone who JonCon describes as merely "adequate" (ADwD p.812) better training than one Jon received? Jon was educated in Winterfell by Maester Lewin w/ access to unique texts like Engines of War. He was educated by Old Nan and the Ned. He was trained in arms by Rodrik Cassel who's been battle tested unlike Duck. He then went on to receive training in arms from Thorne. Maester Aemon shared 100+ years of wisdom. He was chosen and groomed by the Old Bear and Halfhand. He was taught about wildling culture and the lands beyond the Wall and the knowledge long forgotten to the south. And he has far more battle experience than Aegon which has no doubt taught him much and more in comparison to the boy who lazily meandered on a pole boat for the last 16 years. He hardly compares because, words are wind, and thus far he's done nothing but act like a privileged child.

No, in a word. Largely what you've highlighted supports my points. the QUEENS MEN, men loyal to the QUEEN and the red god want the burning, they say it's what they need to clear the storm, they chant the ritual, they do it all. Stannis merely consents, to some of it - he largely reigns them in but he still needs them. The Northmen don't like it because they have a different religion, of course they'd disagree to it. Like a muslim or Jew of the medieval time would be overjoyed for some far off christian to come in and execute somone their way. The North is no stranger to blood sacrifice, they just prefer theirs in front of tree's. Which we have also been shown is much more brutal, burning or dismemberment and having their "Entrails scattered through the tree" , yeaaah the North clearly is "Abhorrent" of blood sacrifice. None of the highlighted parts come from Stannis' mouth, nor do the Northmen care about capital punishment, they care that it isn't to their patron deities.

That is hardly a parable, eating your dead in a plane crash is hardly the same as a fictional universe where they are stuck. No, given the times eating the dead is worthy of death I'd say. The People in that incident IRL lived with the guilt, eat or die - they made their choice and were let go due to the extraordinary circumstance. I'm hardly going to track them down and slay them. In this case he needs to do it to set an example, it isn't right and shouldn't be done. Those men showed no remorse until they were met with a punishment, if left unchecked how long before they turned to real people or just lost all order?

Nor does he eat well, they get a small hunk of horse meat, as befitting of station. The common men always get the worst food, it's the medieval life everywhere. Not his personal choice. I believe he's a leader willing to do what must be done to become king and keep the realm together. Those men needed to die, he was told the burning would clear up the storm, what has he got to lose? Nothing. I'd do the same thing. his ritual isn't that ocult or barbaric compared to a lot of stuff going on. Given the time and the fact that R'hllor has shown the only real power, why wouldn't they do stuff to try and get him to help?

Aegon has taken it, it's been confirmed by GRRM. Cool headed in he is listening to Joncon and the other Golden company heads, I said he is still a rash child but not an idiot. Lost his only major battle only because he was A) Surprised B) Outnumbered C) Being a nice guy - hardly means he's a bad candidate.

Rodrik Vs duck : Alright, rodrik has seen combat, duck is a sellsword, both have seen combat then. Duck is also at least 6 ft tall, described as a giant type isn't he so I'm pretty sure he's more of a challenge than a fat old guy (Who I rather like.) adding to this, it'd make it much more difficult to fight him and we know that wasn't his only trainer. So a Knight we know nothing about? You're bigging up Jon's training with no evidence. Jon is clearly less educated as he knows no other languages and we've been told about Aegons extensive training. They haven't just been on that boat for 16 years :L 100 + years Wisdom? What did he shoot it straight into Jon's mind? No. No he gave a few nuggets of advice, hardly anything which makes him a super genius. Groomed by the bear for what, 4 months? We never saw him learn much in that time anyway, as shown by a lot of his choices. Halfhand also did little in "Grooming" him. Jon has hardly seen any combat. He stood on a wall and fired some arrows. That is it. Oh and he killed half hand. So he's what? 6 kills ahead of Aegon? Who's taken one of the most impossible to take fortresses on the continent? Well, you're right I mean Jon did befriend the scum of the Seven kingdoms at castle black...They are there for doing great shame and dishonour, I'd hardly class a lot of them as awe inspiring individuals. Thornes combat ability will hardly be better than ducks. Your argument is so unbelievable unbiased you like the characters so you assume they're worth 20 of everyone else.

Your point about Aegon though : Privilaged. EXACTLY. He's privileged, but he knows the price he's been well trained, more to rule and lead and fight than Jon. Jon may have more situational wildling fighting experience but I hardly see how given both of their backgrounds you can say Jon is superior, equals at a push, maybe...

[Kate Poem]

I recognise all the good he has done for davos but I just never got over how he choped of his fingers, can't you imagine davos's face when stannis is like thanks for saving me but now I must chop of your fingers!

Other lord, I think, he could look at smuggler as at dirt on his boots, call a servant "give him a some gold and show him the door" and, next Davos could look at the back of the other lord.

And... back to smuggling, Flea Bottom-citizen!

Smuggling was a crime. Davos could be dead - hanged. No feature for his sons. No safe home for his wife.

But Stannis Baratheon is Stannis Baratheon and did what he did and from this moment Stannis has Davos Seaworth's complete loyalty and devotion.

It. Is. Known.

[Guardian of the Lhazareen]

Other lord, I think, he could look at smuggler as at dirt on his boots, call a servant "give him a some gold and show him the door" and, next Davos could look at the back of the other lord.

And... back to smuggling, Flea Bottom-citizen!

Smuggling was a crime. Davos could be dead - hanged. No feature for his sons. No safe home for his wife.

But Stannis Baratheon is Stannis Baratheon and did what he did and from this moment Stannis has Davos Seaworth's complete loyalty and devotion.

It. Is. Known.

well I am a reasonable man, and since you ended your subject in such a manor I agree with you, after all it is imposible to argue with a Dothraki

[By the Old Gods Not theNew]

No, in a word. Largely what you've highlighted supports my points. the QUEENS MEN, men loyal to the QUEEN and the red god want the burning, they say it's what they need to clear the storm, they chant the ritual, they do it all. Stannis merely consents, to some of it - he largely reigns them in but he still needs them.

I'm sorry but the text very clearly indicates that the burning was a religious ritual not simply a form of capital punishment for the crime of cannibalism. Where in westeros does it say the punishment for cannibalism is being burnt alive? There is nothing to indicate that there was a legal necessity guiding his decision to make a blood sacrifice to appease the Red God and/or the Queen's Men.

And your own statement supports my argument. The Queen's men, as you said, "pushed" him to carry out a religious ritual that is abhorrent to the North. The fact that he doesn't believe it will actually stop the snow doesn't mean it wasn't a religious ritual. He's also burned people for a fortuitous wind, so it's not like this is a first.

The Northmen don't like it because they have a different religion, of course they'd disagree to it. Like a muslim or Jew of the medieval time would be overjoyed for some far off christian to come in and execute somone their way. The North is no stranger to blood sacrifice, they just prefer theirs in front of tree's. Which we have also been shown is much more brutal, burning or dismemberment and having their "Entrails scattered through the tree" , yeaaah the North clearly is "Abhorrent" of blood sacrifice. None of the highlighted parts come from Stannis' mouth, nor do the Northmen care about capital punishment, they care that it isn't to their patron deities.

I never said the North abhorred blood sacrifice. I clearly stated that they abhor burning people alive in the name of the Lord of Light. And in the text the Northmen clearly state that they are opposed to the burning,

“What has your southron god to do with snow?” demanded Artos Flint. His black beard was crusted with ice.“This is the wroth of the old gods come upon us. It is them we should appease.”

“Aye,” said Big Bucket Wull. “Red Rahloo means nothing here. You will only make the old gods angry. They are watching from their island.”

It's not that they oppose capital punishment, or even blood sacrifice, as they're clearly advocating appeasing the Old Gods.

That is hardly a parable, eating your dead in a plane crash is hardly the same as a fictional universe where they are stuck. No, given the times eating the dead is worthy of death I'd say. The People in that incident IRL lived with the guilt, eat or die - they made their choice and were let go due to the extraordinary circumstance. I'm hardly going to track them down and slay them. In this case he needs to do it to set an example, it isn't right and shouldn't be done. Those men showed no remorse until they were met with a punishment, if left unchecked how long before they turned to real people or just lost all order?

Why does he need to set an example by burning people? How is okay for Stannis to have considered cannibalism during the siege at Storm's End but a capital offense in the crofter's village? Was Stannis' camp that close to full scale cannibal mutiny?

I doubt it. As Asha points out most of the camp was horrified to hear of the cannibalism. It appears the cultural taboo against cannibalism is working for the vast majority of the camp. There doesn't seem to be a risk of mass cannibalism just waiting break out. We know that Northerns who comprise over half of the force understand winter and abhor cannibalism (tales of cannibals on Skagos, and worries of cannibal wildlings flooding into the North). The only people who need to be kept in line are Stannis' and if the only way he can do that is by burning people alive, well than he has some leadership issues and probably isn't fit to rule the entire realm.

Nor does he eat well, they get a small hunk of horse meat, as befitting of station. The common men always get the worst food, it's the medieval life everywhere. Not his personal choice.

He has people he needs to feed, who are starving to death, while others are foregoing meals because they have plenty. This is a mismanagement of resource that is causing instability in the camp, which you argue has produced a crisis of order that could cause a cannibalistic mutiny. If the crofter's village is a microcosom of westeros under Stannis, than he's proving a terrible choice for King w/ winter coming. The smallfolk will starve, be forced into deprivation, be persecuted for trying to survive and made an example of in b/s religious rituals so that some false god and few southern religious fanatics can be appeased.

I believe he's a leader willing to do what must be done to become king and keep the realm together. Those men needed to die, he was told the burning would clear up the storm, what has he got to lose? Nothing. I'd do the same thing. his ritual isn't that ocult or barbaric compared to a lot of stuff going on. Given the time and the fact that R'hllor has shown the only real power, why wouldn't they do stuff to try and get him to help?

I thought your argument was that the burning was a form of capital punishment not a religious ritual...now it's "his ritual" and he has good reason to believe the sacrifice "would clear up the storm" because "R'hllor has shown the only real power"...which is it?

Aegon has taken it, it's been confirmed by GRRM. Cool headed in he is listening to Joncon and the other Golden company heads, I said he is still a rash child but not an idiot. Lost his only major battle only because he was A) Surprised B) Outnumbered C) Being a nice guy - hardly means he's a bad candidate.

Yeah i know.

this the DwD forum any confirmed spoilers form TWoW need to have a spoiler alert, hence the spoiler alert.

Rodrik Vs duck : Alright, rodrik has seen combat, duck is a sellsword, both have seen combat then. Duck is also at least 6 ft tall, described as a giant type isn't he so I'm pretty sure he's more of a challenge than a fat old guy (Who I rather like.) adding to this, it'd make it much more difficult to fight him and we know that wasn't his only trainer. So a Knight we know nothing about? You're bigging up Jon's training with no evidence.

Jon is clearly less educated as he knows no other languages and we've been told about Aegons extensive training. They haven't just been on that boat for 16 years :L 100 + years Wisdom? What did he shoot it straight into Jon's mind? No. No he gave a few nuggets of advice, hardly anything which makes him a super genius. Groomed by the bear for what, 4 months? We never saw him learn much in that time anyway, as shown by a lot of his choices. Halfhand also did little in "Grooming" him. Jon has hardly seen any combat. He stood on a wall and fired some arrows. That is it. Oh and he killed half hand. So he's what? 6 kills ahead of Aegon? Who's taken one of the most impossible to take fortresses on the continent? Well, you're right I mean Jon did befriend the scum of the Seven kingdoms at castle black...They are there for doing great shame and dishonour, I'd hardly class a lot of them as awe inspiring individuals. Thornes combat ability will hardly be better than ducks. Your argument is so unbelievable unbiased you like the characters so you assume they're worth 20 of everyone else.

Wow, what series have you been reading...because the one i have has chronicled Jon for 4/5 books (AFoK only elaborates upon Jon's character via Sam so it's not really the same as the rest w/ PoVs from Jon) and introduced a sketchy character part way through the 5th book. You're only justification for why Aegon is great is based off of a spoiler from TWoW, that you should be more courteous and conceal in this forum. And even that is a laughable piece of evidence. Tell me what you know about Aegon's exploits in this grand accomplishment....and tell me of all that he learned on the pole boat...and how Jon never learned anything nor did anything...please be unbiased and use evidence.

[Lion of Judah]

I agree Stannis is the rightful king, but he won't get very comfortable in that chair because Daenerys will be taking it from him.

[hiraeth]

First, I think it's incorrect to assume that experiencing hardships make a great leader. In Westeros, a hard life is the rule rather than the exception, and there is nothing to say that not experiencing hardships precludes a man from being a good king. Some people are empathetic enough that even if they didn't suffer themselves, they can relate to the suffering of others. That is more important than just merely experiencing difficult events. Take Sansa vs. Shae - Shae's background is a lot harsher, and she's seen and done things that Sansa has never had to do. But Sansa's growing ability to empathize with people is what makes her a good person and one day, a good lady.

Secondly, we don't know what exactly Aegon went through in the first 16 years of his life. Given the way they lived on Essos, constantly going from place to place, hiding their identity, living as poor travelers, it's likely that Aegon has seen and experienced some of the same hardships as Jon. In fact, until Jon joined the Night's Watch, I'd say Aegon and Jon were equal. Jon was treated poorly by Catelyn, but in all other accounts, he was well-take care of in Winterfell, receiving the same training and education as Robb, had the highest quality arms and clothing, and never went to bed with an empty belly. Jon in fact lived a far better life than other people in his position. As for Aegon, his closest companions may have known he was a king, but to everyone else that met them, he was just the son of a sell-sword. Don't forget that he's had to live with the knowledge that his family was murdered and that if it hadn't been for the switch, he would have ended up as red pulp on the wall - and he also knows that another innocent baby was killed in his place. That's not easy to live with either.

Jon's had the chance to prove himself in a leadership position; it's not Aegon's fault that hasn't happened for him yet. We'll see how things are now that he's in Westeros, but saying that Aegon makes a poor king compared to Jon isn't quite fair.

Experiencing hardships and great moral dilemas actually helps shape an intelligent, trained and talented person into a good leader... OK, empathy is great, Jon needs to work on that... But, somehow I am more emphatic to people who have experienced problems in their past that are similar to what I've been through... That is only natural... Jon has lived through many hardships and he's experience will help him be more emphatic... But he cannot be as emphatic as Sansa, he must act cool and collected because he is not a little girl who would soon be a lady fighting on a completely different battlefield - he's Lord Commander, responsible for the safety of the Realm, many people depending on him for their survival... I am surprised that you have not noticed that Jon is emphatic but cannot allow himself to be distracted...

Jon's father was executed, his beloved half-brother was massacred, his younger half-brothers are presumed dead, his half-sisters are missing, he hasn't got a clue about their whereabouts on a continent torn by a civil war... That's not easy to live with...

Aegon, however, does not have the responsibility to feed or defend anyone, has JonCon to help him as a father figure, he even rebels a little, he does, more or less the things expected from a boy his age at that particular time and place... Nothing special...Aegon has not done anything so far to show that he's good king material. On the contrary, he's shown some charisma, rashness and propensity to get angry if beaten... And I have serious doubts about his upbringing by a man who was so clearly in love with his father, I have a slight feeling that he's been spoilt... Even if you compare their father figures, although JonCon is an impressive man, I think Jon had a slightly better role model. And Jon has warging abilities as an extra...

[Where Boars Glow]

^{Right, wrong, good, bad, the man just doesn't have the swords and money to make a real play.}

[hiraeth]

what provisions can he make? He's a man, not a god. He can't magic food out of the air, nor can he wait at deepwood. Jon meanwhile has stores at a stationary point and won't be moving, with a harbor at his disposal, food can easily be brought in by any fool.

"Burning people in obscure rituals", no it's called an execution for cannibalism. His men are falling back in line. He was pushed to do that by his men and really, seems like an okay execution method to me, nothing wrong with burning people.

If "Mance" hadn't have been burnt he'd have been beheaded. Hardly a difference

Aegon, that's hardly justification "He killed a guy he befriended for about 2 weeks, Aegon will NEEEEVVERRRR get that" ...Yes, yes he will. He's already had better training than Jon, now he's putting it into action, he's proven cool headed but still young and rash for glory, hardly his fault. He's taken Stormsend and led the attack, he's seen men die for him then and for the realm so I hardly see how you can say he hardly compares to jon.

Jon is an alright commander, I'm not saying he's bad. I'm saying he's overrated. He is by no means the best or worst commander like many people say. He is above average at best, in my honest opinion and until he does more I will never think of him as more because he's not really had to struggle that much -whatever you say, killing one man who was a friend, commanding one battle (That Stannis won) and then getting stabbed by your own men is hardly the career of a good commander. George Patton, Bohemond, Tancred, Willam the Bastard, Longshanks etc. None of them were known for breaking an oath and getting stabbed by their men.

Where I come from, people make provisions when they go to war... You need to feed the army, equip them with weapons, means of transportation even if your resources are scarce... As a good commander, you need to take into account the terrain, the weather conditions, the climate, the local population, etc., and, based on that, make serious plans for supplying the army along the way... Jon has even helped him by giving him information about the local clans...

Well, in my part of the world there is a clear difference between a religious ritual and a punishment... Burning people is a sadistic ritual - fair punishment is what Ned does when faced with a deserter. There is a clear line dividing those two acts... Stannis is utalitarian when it comes to religion, but can you imagine Ned or Jon accepting this kind of behaviour... Politically, it's more savvy to do what Stannis does, but not in the long-run.

George Patton, Bohemond, Tancred, Willam the Bastard, Longshanks?!!!??? What makes you think other people share your opinion about their quality as commanders? Personally, I have much more respect for Zivojin Misic, Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Saladin... Maybe that is the reason we cannot agree on the subject of Jon vs. Stannis and Aegon... Different cultures, different points of view...

[Knight errant]

Where I come from, people make provisions when they go to war... You need to feed the army, equip them with weapons, means of transportation even if your resources are scarce... As a good commander, you need to take into account the terrain, the weather conditions, the climate, the local population, etc., and, based on that, make serious plans for supplying the army along the way... Jon has even helped him by giving him information about the local clans...

Well, in my part of the world there is a clear difference between a religious ritual and a punishment... Burning people is a sadistic ritual - fair punishment is what Ned does when faced with a deserter. There is a clear line dividing those two acts... Stannis is utalitarian when it comes to religion, but can you imagine Ned or Jon accepting this kind of behaviour... Politically, it's more savvy to do what Stannis does, but not in the long-run.

George Patton, Bohemond, Tancred, Willam the Bastard, Longshanks?!!!??? What makes you think other people share your opinion about their quality as commanders? Personally, I have much more respect for Zivojin Misic, Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Saladin... Maybe that is the reason we cannot agree on the subject of Jon vs. Stannis and Aegon... Different cultures, different points of view...

I was in a rush so I grabbed a couple of names off the top of my head. Saladin would've lost the third crusade if not for a power struggle in the west so I'd rather not include him haha I picked Bohemond because he beat 12k cav with at most 500 cavalry. That's good generalship. Saladins most famous victory for instance : Hattin 17k crusaders against 20k Saladins men. He won but then he had more troops. Guess it is a difference of culture...Although I do dote over Saladin, nice guy by all reports.

I'd like to say he mentioned contemplating it - but didn't, he wouldn't. He'd rather starve than that.

[Knight errant]

I'm sorry but the text very clearly indicates that the burning was a religious ritual not simply a form of capital punishment for the crime of cannibalism. Where in westeros does it say the punishment for cannibalism is being burnt alive? There is nothing to indicate that there was a legal necessity guiding his decision to make a blood sacrifice to appease the Red God and/or the Queen's Men.

And your own statement supports my argument. The Queen's men, as you said, "pushed" him to carry out a religious ritual that is abhorrent to the North. The fact that he doesn't believe it will actually stop the snow doesn't mean it wasn't a religious ritual. He's also burned people for a fortuitous wind, so it's not like this is a first.

I never said the North abhorred blood sacrifice. I clearly stated that they abhor burning people alive in the name of the Lord of Light. And in the text the Northmen clearly state that they are opposed to the burning,

“What has your southron god to do with snow?” demanded Artos Flint. His black beard was crusted with ice.“This is the wroth of the old gods come upon us. It is them we should appease.”

“Aye,” said Big Bucket Wull. “Red Rahloo means nothing here. You will only make the old gods angry. They are watching from their island.”

It's not that they oppose capital punishment, or even blood sacrifice, as they're clearly advocating appeasing the Old Gods.

Why does he need to set an example by burning people? How is okay for Stannis to have considered cannibalism during the siege at Storm's End but a capital offense in the crofter's village? Was Stannis' camp that close to full scale cannibal mutiny?

I doubt it. As Asha points out most of the camp was horrified to hear of the cannibalism. It appears the cultural taboo against cannibalism is working for the vast majority of the camp. There doesn't seem to be a risk of mass cannibalism just waiting break out. We know that Northerns who comprise over half of the force understand winter and abhor cannibalism (tales of cannibals on Skagos, and worries of cannibal wildlings flooding into the North). The only people who need to be kept in line are Stannis' and if the only way he can do that is by burning people alive, well than he has some leadership issues and probably isn't fit to rule the entire realm.

He has people he needs to feed, who are starving to death, while others are foregoing meals because they have plenty. This is a mismanagement of resource that is causing instability in the camp, which you argue has produced a crisis of order that could cause a cannibalistic mutiny. If the crofter's village is a microcosom of westeros under Stannis, than he's proving a terrible choice for King w/ winter coming. The smallfolk will starve, be forced into deprivation, be persecuted for trying to survive and made an example of in b/s religious rituals so that some false god and few southern religious fanatics can be appeased.

I thought your argument was that the burning was a form of capital punishment not a religious ritual...now it's "his ritual" and he has good reason to believe the sacrifice "would clear up the storm" because "R'hllor has shown the only real power"...which is it?

Yeah i know.

this the DwD forum any confirmed spoilers form TWoW need to have a spoiler alert, hence the spoiler alert.

Wow, what series have you been reading...because the one i have has chronicled Jon for 4/5 books (AFoK only elaborates upon Jon's character via Sam so it's not really the same as the rest w/ PoVs from Jon) and introduced a sketchy character part way through the 5th book. You're only justification for why Aegon is great is based off of a spoiler from TWoW, that you should be more courteous and conceal in this forum. And even that is a laughable piece of evidence. Tell me what you know about Aegon's exploits in this grand accomplishment....and tell me of all that he learned on the pole boat...and how Jon never learned anything nor did anything...please be unbiased and use evidence.

We're both biased, fair. However as Jon has been stabbed to death by his own men is that not the end of all leadership discussions? Nor has he won any great battles, nor has he fought many foes (He loses to mance in that spar and can only beat kids who've never been trained and a guy who lets him win + mauled by a direwolf) Jon has as great a rapport of conquest as Aegon tbh. Jon has more empathatic moments than the new comer. We've had five books getting to know him so of course we love the guy but it's not who we like but who would be good. He'd be acceptable but I maintain that he is not King material, it's just something about him I don't believe is very kingly he just hasn't proven himself commpetent enough.

Capital punishment, seems okay for cannibals to me, unless you think their shouldn't be a punishment for eating the dead hmmmm? No, death seems okay, less it spread or order breakdown it needed to be done.

The choice was to keep his morale up and some men happy. The Northmen and Asha of course don't like the method. But who cares? What's wrong with it being an execution for him and a morale boosting ritual for his knights? His next sacrifice is for the Northmen who you don't mind because it's decapitation. He's so far united two different religions and cultures so it's hardly bad leadership on his part. He can't be shown to be lenient as he explained in a chapter like that, he's never been charismatic. I don't be grudge him for that. What would you do? Leave them to run around and eat the others who died?

What is even the point of this argument? Stannis burned some Cannibals, terrible - hardly. He's much better than the other candidates for kingship next to Dany the genocidal maniac, an inbred and an untested boy. I want him to win because he brings justice to the realm and he'd keep it together. He is the best choice alive and you may say Jon is better but A) That isn't fact and B) He is currently a Bastard, an illegitimate bastard as well, so how is he to gain the throne? Oh right - he won't. That's a fairy tale and any idea of a fairy tale ending for this died at the RW with most peoples favorite characters (I of course refer to the freys who lost their lives).

[MtnLion]

So, Stannis bends to the desires of various factions, and that is good leadership?

[Knight errant]

Not really what he did though, is it? That's turning my words. He was going to execute some guys so why not keep some of his best fighters happy? Seems pretty smart to me.

[MtnLion]

The choice was to keep his morale up and some men happy. The Northmen and Asha of course don't like the method. But who cares? What's wrong with it being an execution for him and a morale boosting ritual for his knights? His next sacrifice is for the Northmen who you don't mind because it's decapitation. He's so far united two different religions and cultures so it's hardly bad leadership on his part. He can't be shown to be lenient as he explained in a chapter like that, he's never been charismatic.

Who cares whether one death is better than another? It is obvious from the text that the two different religions will be going at each other tooth and nail, soon enough. Stannis needs to find a method of execution that favors neither to provide a unifying force for the group. Offering some to the flames and some to the trees is going to lead to division. (Ooops, I said "lead".)

[Knight errant]

Who cares whether one death is better than another? It is obvious from the text that the two different religions will be going at each other tooth and nail, soon enough. Stannis needs to find a method of execution that favors neither to provide a unifying force for the group. Offering some to the flames and some to the trees is going to lead to division. (Ooops, I said "lead".)

Hardly , they don't seem like they will be going against each other anytime soon. Anyway he's executing Theon to the Weirwood, that's instant Northern support. Who do you support for the throne then Mtnlion? I could do with a good laugh when the say Jon or Dany.

[MtnLion]

Hardly , they don't seem like they will be going against each other anytime soon. Anyway he's executing Theon to the Weirwood, that's instant Northern support. Who do you support for the throne then Mtnlion? I could do with a good laugh when the say Jon or Dany.

Let's stay on point, for a few more lines, here. Stannis is following. He is acquiescing to the demands to feed the red god. Jon didn't do this, he executed what he thought was Mance to avoid excessive suffering. That excessive suffering is demanded by a sadistic group, and Stannis is not standing up to them, as those who are less inclined to sadism would prefer. Leadership in this case would certainly be for Stannis to come up with something semi-original as a solution, that is not an afront to either party and gets the job done. He is not holding the group together, observe the discontent in the words of the northmen. If Stannis feeds the flames again, I don't think it should be a surprise to anyone if the northmen stab him in the back, especially if weirwood is burnt. Is it Stannis' fault because he was not empathetic with the northmen? I suppose on some level it is. A good leader knows how to balance the desires of his forces, to ensure that divisions are healed rather than emphasized.

[TheMysteriousOne]

Stannis ain't the rightful king...E-Ro and ab aeterno are going to get me now...

But, yeah, he isn't.

[Lion of Judah]

^{Right, wrong, good, bad, the man just doesn't have the swords and money to make a real play.}

Partially agree, he has the money, but I don't think he can acquire the swords he sent Massey to get.

[Knight errant]

Let's stay on point, for a few more lines, here. Stannis is following. He is acquiescing to the demands to feed the red god. Jon didn't do this, he executed what he thought was Mance to avoid excessive suffering. That excessive suffering is demanded by a sadistic group, and Stannis is not standing up to them, as those who are less inclined to sadism would prefer. Leadership in this case would certainly be for Stannis to come up with something semi-original as a solution, that is not an afront to either party and gets the job done. He is not holding the group together, observe the discontent in the words of the northmen. If Stannis feeds the flames again, I don't think it should be a surprise to anyone if the northmen stab him in the back, especially if weirwood is burnt. Is it Stannis' fault because he was not empathetic with the northmen? I suppose on some level it is. A good leader knows how to balance the desires of his forces, to ensure that divisions are healed rather than emphasized.

Jon didn't do any of this either. He got stabbed because he failed to do so, really isn't that all the evidence you need? One got stabbed by his own men, the other didn't, I know who I think the better leader is because of it. The Northmen won't betray him if he burned another fifty. Why? Because they aren't idiots. they know he'll get what they desire. Nor would they betray him for killing guilty men , their only complaint is a different god and they are still hosting that okay as is shown by their numerous scenes of not being that bothered. Discontent and mildly annoyed is different to up in arms and not obeying. He's won their loyalty through being humble and cool headed they are with him.