Stannis is the One True King

[Knight errant]

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

But, yeah, he isn't.

Better than any Targ I've seen.

[TheMysteriousOne]

Better than any Targ I've seen.

Alright, that's your opinion. There were so many Targaryen kings better than Stannis.

Still doesn't change the fact that Stannis isn't the rightful king :P

[STANN1SBARATHEON]

"Robert told me to hold Storm's End, so I held it. Then he told me he was giving it to Renly, so I gave it up. Insult or not, I gave it up. Because Robert was my older brother, and he was the king, and i've always done my duty. But now I'm the rightful king, by every law of Westeros."

-Stannis Baratheon

King of Westeros

[By the Old Gods Not theNew]

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).

There's clearly no point in continuing this debate. We fundamentally disagree on a wide variety of issues...for instance we disagree as to whether or not subjective determinations such as "likability" could be characterized as facts, we disagree about whether or not speculation from TWoW constitutes a fact, we disagree about the use of spoiler tags to hide spoilers from TWoW in the DwD forum, we disagree about whether or not it's okay to burn people alive in b/s religious rituals to maintain order, etc. It seems like facts and the text have become dubious foundations upon which to base this discussion, we clearly disagree even on what a fact is, so yeah whatev's...Jon's no Mance but he's better than the rest of the sorry lot fighting for the meaningless southern throne.

[STANN1SBARATHEON]

There's clearly no point in continuing this debate. We fundamentally disagree on a wide variety of issues...for instance we disagree as to whether or not subjective determinations such as "likability" could be characterized as facts, we disagree about whether or not speculation from TWoW constitutes a fact, we disagree about the use of spoiler tags to hide spoilers from TWoW in the DwD forum, we disagree about whether or not it's okay to burn people alive in b/s religious rituals to maintain order, etc. It seems like facts and the text have become dubious foundations upon which to base this discussion, we clearly disagree even on what a fact is, so yeah whatev's...Jon's no Mance but he's better than the rest of the sorry lot fighting for the meaningless southern throne.

Dam, 8 mile Knight errant,

OldGods told you,

get your ass back to 8 Mile

[STANN1SBARATHEON]

if its all about likability, we all like Jon Snow, right? He is the only one besides Stannis who knows that the real enemy is the Others, that they are the ones everyone needs to unite against and fight.

Dany's story isn't about (in my opnion) ultimately going to be about securing the Iron Throne, hers is a larger story, grander. She's the one who is suppose to be intricate in fighting the Others when the long night comes. We know this because she is the Mother of Dragons, hers is a song of ice and fire. She's important, you might say, on more of a planetary scale, everywhere she goes she frees slaves, people call her "mother", she's ending the oppression all over the place before finally coming home to Westeros to fight the Others, that's why she's important.

As far as Jon and his lineage and just who are the three heads of the dragon, all that remains to be seen (though the three heads of the Dragon have got to be Dany, Jon, and Bran, am i right?) but i firmly believe that as far as Westeros is concerned, Stannis is the rightful king that should take the throne because he's best suited for the job. Just like everybody's favorite kidnapper Rhaegar had wanted to make changes to the King's council and court (he told that to Jamie before leaving for the Trident), Stannis also wanted to scour King's Landing and the Red Keep of all the liars and schemers that he knew to be false. he has no illusions about the office of king, he has admitted that he never wanted it, but dammit it's his by rights.

Dany's claim may be equal to his in her own right, but if i had to choose one of them i would pick Stannis. Is this the wrong choice? lets hear it...

[MtnLion]

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.

I do disagree about the northmen. They are biding their time, watching the southerners deplete themselves in an environment that they have learned to survive in. They are with Stannis only because Jon was a good enough leader to tell Stannis about the faults in his plans, and lead Stannis in the correct direction. Stannis is a follower, he has been following Melisandre, and he is following Jon, but he is doing a miserable job of it at his encampment. He has distanced himself from everyone, and is not paying any attention to what is going on.

He had to be told by Jon about the Karstarks, he didn't uncover it himself.

That would have been one faction that would have stabbed him in the back, and Jon is the one who saved him.

Jon was stabbed by fellow members of the watch, but it sure seems that they regretted doing so. I surmise that there is something else driving them to do it. The one thing that comes immediately to mind is Alliser Thorne, and his hatred of Jon. He fears for his life while Jon is Lord Commander, and he certainly could have swayed the plotters into attacking Jon.

Between Jon and Stannis, Jon is the far superior leader.

ETA: spoiler, I forgot what forum this was in.

[Guardian of the Lhazareen]

Alright, that's your opinion. There were so many Targaryen kings better than Stannis.

Still doesn't change the fact that Stannis isn't the rightful king :P

maybe in our eyes yes but what I think we are always so quick to forget is that hardly anyone knows about the twincest and those who do don't even believe it!

[MtnLion]

Dany's claim may be equal to his in her own right, but if i had to choose one of them i would pick Stannis. Is this the wrong choice? lets hear it...

Actually, I believe that Jon is the heir to the Iron Throne. The evidence is present, but it has not been recognized or proclaimed.

I go back to the three lies that Daenerys must prove as false. One will be a blue eyed king that casts no shadow. Yes, Stannis is legally the heir to Robert, and should be king. He is blue eyed. Did he give all of his shadows to Melisandre? Will she prove that he is not the true heir to the Targaryen dynasty or if his sword is a fake and that he is not tPtwP with his fake sword? The fake sword has me concerned, too. It will be virtually worthless in the Battle for the Dawn, yet many will choose to follow Stannis because his sword appears to be Lightbringer. Melisandre with her theatrics is going to cause a lot of grief to the cause of fighting off the Others.

The second lie is about a cloth dragon supported on poles, swaying amid a cheering crowd. In dragon dreams the dragon usually refers to a Targaryen. So it is safe to assume that a Targaryen will be supported and surrounded by a great deal of support in Westeros. This sounds like a future for Aegon, and that Daenerys must expose something false about him. Might he be a false dragon? I think so, however it happened he is not Rhaegar's heir, even though everyone will be told that he is.

The third is a great stone beast that will take to the air and breath shadow fire. Will Melisandre succeed in waking a stone dragon? Will Euron succeed in waking a stone dragon. It certainly looks like a stone dragon to me, but we haven't enough information, yet.

Then I turn to one of the most interesting things from the HotU, The blue flower growing from a chink in a wall of ice that fills the air with sweetness. Does Daenerys recognize the true PtwP as being Jon? Does she fall in love with him? Much and more is yet to come. ;)

[Guardian of the Lhazareen]

Actually, I believe that Jon is the heir to the Iron Throne. The evidence is present, but it has not been recognized or proclaimed.

I go back to the three lies that Daenerys must prove as false. One will be a blue eyed king that casts no shadow. Yes, Stannis is legally the heir to Robert, and should be king. He is blue eyed. Did he give all of his shadows to Melisandre? Will she prove that he is not the true heir to the Targaryen dynasty or if his sword is a fake and that he is not tPtwP with his fake sword? The fake sword has me concerned, too. It will be virtually worthless in the Battle for the Dawn, yet many will choose to follow Stannis because his sword appears to be Lightbringer. Melisandre with her theatrics is going to cause a lot of grief to the cause of fighting off the Others.

The second lie is about a cloth dragon supported on poles, swaying amid a cheering crowd. In dragon dreams the dragon usually refers to a Targaryen. So it is safe to assume that a Targaryen will be supported and surrounded by a great deal of support in Westeros. This sounds like a future for Aegon, and that Daenerys must expose something false about him. Might he be a false dragon? I think so, however it happened he is not Rhaegar's heir, even though everyone will be told that he is.

The third is a great stone beast that will take to the air and breath shadow fire. Will Melisandre succeed in waking a stone dragon? Will Euron succeed in waking a stone dragon. It certainly looks like a stone dragon to me, but we haven't enough information, yet.

Then I turn to one of the most interesting things from the HotU, The blue flower growing from a chink in a wall of ice that fills the air with sweetness. Does Daenerys recognize the true PtwP as being Jon? Does she fall in love with him? Much and more is yet to come. ;)

John will have no claim to speak of untill R+L = J is regognised by the majority of westeros and he is legitamized !!

[MtnLion]

Actually, I believe that Jon is the heir to the Iron Throne. The evidence is present, but it has not been recognized or proclaimed.

John will have no claim to speak of untill R+L = J is regognised by the majority of westeros and he is legitamized !!

I thought that is what this line said. And, it is evident that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, too, so legitimization is not necessary.

[Knight errant]

I do disagree about the northmen. They are biding their time, watching the southerners deplete themselves in an environment that they have learned to survive in. They are with Stannis only because Jon was a good enough leader to tell Stannis about the faults in his plans, and lead Stannis in the correct direction. Stannis is a follower, he has been following Melisandre, and he is following Jon, but he is doing a miserable job of it at his encampment. He has distanced himself from everyone, and is not paying any attention to what is going on.

He had to be told by Jon about the Karstarks, he didn't uncover it himself.

That would have been one faction that would have stabbed him in the back, and Jon is the one who saved him.

Jon was stabbed by fellow members of the watch, but it sure seems that they regretted doing so. I surmise that there is something else driving them to do it. The one thing that comes immediately to mind is Alliser Thorne, and his hatred of Jon. He fears for his life while Jon is Lord Commander, and he certainly could have swayed the plotters into attacking Jon.

Between Jon and Stannis, Jon is the far superior leader.

ETA: spoiler, I forgot what forum this was in.

They don't know Jon, this is my point. He's an unknown bastard who they have had little contact with they won't follow him for no reason. Especially as he's NW. This is why we can't have nice things. How would he uncover their plot, one in which Jon only found out about by chance. They also are not the Mormonts, mountain clans or Glovers who are all indebted to him. The Karstarks in question were one family who wanted personal game, not because of Stannis personally so it's a bit unrelated.

Imagine then a King Stannis with Jon as master of Laws. That'd be perfect in my eyes. Jon would suit that perfectly, but not higher. He's a good adviser.

He isn't a follow, he LISTENS to advise , unlike Jon "the I'm not a bigot" snow who eschews all advise given to him in most cases. Stannis listened to Davos, listened to Jon, listened to Mel and acted on it, in almost every time the best he could.

I believe he's isolated himself because he's seeing into the future through the flames. Seems to me judging by the description, moreover he's going to win that battle, from what we can see. So we know he's a good commander when he has every disadvantage but still wins. Although this is speculation.

Also R and J weren't married Mtnlion - that is speculation - as is his parentage. He also has no semblance of a targ so it'll be almost impossible to prove his claim, who's alive of repute to confirm it? Are the people of westeros supposed to take some random bastards claim ? Will any of the High Lords ? I doubt it. I disagree with most of your theories as too few evidence, ironic when I back Stannis is still alive I know but oh well. Jon and Dany are cousins, that's errr.... rigghhttt....I hope they don't get together for that...

[Knight errant]

There's clearly no point in continuing this debate. We fundamentally disagree on a wide variety of issues...for instance we disagree as to whether or not subjective determinations such as "likability" could be characterized as facts, we disagree about whether or not speculation from TWoW constitutes a fact, we disagree about the use of spoiler tags to hide spoilers from TWoW in the DwD forum, we disagree about whether or not it's okay to burn people alive in b/s religious rituals to maintain order, etc. It seems like facts and the text have become dubious foundations upon which to base this discussion, we clearly disagree even on what a fact is, so yeah whatev's...Jon's no Mance but he's better than the rest of the sorry lot fighting for the meaningless southern throne.

Sorry, I'll put them in. We do agree to disagree and should Jon actually become king I'll track you down and apologize. Stannis is better and more likely and logically to get it in my eyes.

Also what's wrong with burning? Lots of IRL religions did it for a lot less and those men were actually guilty. They ate another Human being, something which is an affront to the gods. Old, new and red. The fact it maintains order is good. A logical move really given the situation. I have only ever used facts, apart from in reference Aegon, where you may be right however you strayed from facts long before in referencing the "Experiences" Jon had been through to make him more of a candidate than one kid trained to be king from birth and another 30 something year old man who has been involved in at least two or three wars on top of everything else. He's not much better than many of them fighting for the "Meaningless" throne. Stannis is the only one who came and saved Jon's sorry ass at the wall instead of pursuing his "Stupid southern throne".

[By the Old Gods Not theNew]

Thanks, sorry for being rude. no need to apologize about Jon/Stan, we can differ on this point, but if Stan turns out to be the better man, I will likewise seek you out and apologize.

as to the issue of burning lets agree to disagree here as well. You value order and discipline i think they're overrated.

As to the issue of facts...arguing that i strayed from the facts is inaccurate. And even if i did stray from the facts (which i didn't) that doesn't justify further decontextualization and bastardization of the text. My first post in this thread, as well as the others, is based in textual evidence - i.e. facts. Mance and Stannis both gave Jon credit for what he accomplished at CB, that's a fact. He achieved more w/ less than Cotter Pyke and Dany Mallister, again it's a fact. He has tried to explain to Bowen Marsh why it's necessary to bring the Wildlings south of the wall. There are NWmen that are loyal to him. and he clearly won the loyalty of the wildling army he rallied in the Shield Hall shortly before being stabbed in the back. Aemon has influenced Jon, it's a fact. Jon doesn't believe Stan is AA because of Aemon. He flexes his hand constantly because of Aemon. He sent Aemon and Mance's baby away because he believes Aemon's life is in danger partly because Aemon confirms that there is power in Kings blood and there is a real risk of keeping him around Stan and Mel. This is all evidence that Aemon has influenced Jon's thinking and decision making process. You may disagree that this has had much of an effect but you can't deny that it happened. I can understand if you've drawn a different conclusion than me, but i can't understand denying basic facts.

That said most of your arguments are predicated on subjective (Stan/Aegon are better than Jon) and speculative statements (TWoW spoilers) that can't really be characterized as facts. It is not a fact to say that you think jon's experience doesn't prepare him to be king, that's an evaluative statement not a factual statement. I think if you look back and check out our posts you will see that I have used facts to support the claim that Jon is a worthy leader, on par w/, if not preferable to, Stannis, and from what we know he's preferable to Aegon. The facts of Jon's experience are incontrovertible, they are in the texts, the conclusions we draw from these facts, however, are indeed open to debate and difference of perspective. So you may have drawn a different conclusion from the facts but that doesn't mean I have strayed from the facts. The facts from the texts are what have influenced my evaluative statement - thus the "ought" statement is derived from the "is" statement. Jon is experienced (this is a fact that can't be denied) he would therefore make a good king (this is a value statement that can be challenged). If you have a problem w/ the latter it's not because the former is factually inaccurate it's because we interpret the implications of these facts differently.

So in conclusion thanks again, sorry if wasn't the best of interlocutors, I appreciate the spirited debate and respect that we have different opinions on these issues.

[MtnLion]

Also R and J weren't married Mtnlion - that is speculation - as is his parentage.

I will address this, then I am done. The kingsguard at the tower defended the king with their lives, that is the only explanation. THe only possible heir at that tower is Jon. It is factual.

[Tini]

I will address this, then I am done. The kingsguard at the tower defended the king with their lives, that is the only explanation. THe only possible heir at that tower is Jon. It is factual.

The Kingsguard at the tower were following their orders. Those orders did not expire with Aerys and Rhaegar's deaths. That alone is enough to explain their actions.

[MtnLion]

The Kingsguard at the tower were following their orders. Those orders did not expire with Aerys and Rhaegar's deaths. That alone is enough to explain their actions.

No, they were observing their vow to protect and defend the king, they say so. Ned says that they were a shining example for all of the world, so they weren't lying.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

The Kingsguard at the tower were following their orders. Those orders did not expire with Aerys and Rhaegar's deaths. That alone is enough to explain their actions.

The Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy refer to their vows as members of the Kingsguard as their reasoning for staying at the Tower of Joy. They even reference their vows when asked why they are not with Viserys, who is believed to be the Targaryren king, and still claim to be upholding their vows as members of the Kingsguard. As members of the Kingsguard their first priority is their king. These three men have been painted throughout the series as some of the most honorable members of the Kingsguard and the most faithful to their vows, regardless of the situation. Why would they abandon their king to guard a mistress when the people looking for her wish her no harm?

[Tini]

It still does not mean that Jon is the legitimate heir to the throne. Maybe the Kingsguard at the Tower considered him the heir, but it seems they followed Rhaegar rather than Aerys.

Rhaegar needed his father's approval for a marriage, and I don't think Aerys gave it. A marriage, if there was a marriage, would then be invalid. If Rhaegar had replaced his father as it seems he intended, that might not have mattered but Aerys survived his son.

[Brandon Martell]

Rhaegar needed his father's approval for a marriage, and I don't think Aerys gave it. A marriage, if there was a marriage, would then be invalid. If Rhaegar had replaced his father as it seems he intended, that might not have mattered but Aerys survived his son.

Father's approval is only mandatory for females. Tyrion married without his father's approval, and it was technically still a marriage.