Jon is a traitor to the Night Watch

[Şeytan Karaateş]

Whether these charges true or not it doesn't matter, The Dragon answers to no one.

[Lord Varys]

21 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

1) Come on.  Jon does not focus on becoming a "great warrior".  He practices enough so that he will be able to hold his own to the best of his ability if it comes to combat.  A commander shouldn't put himself in the front line but he can't be or be seen to be incapable either.  No idea what your beef about him practicing is really getting at.

I just don't like it very much. It is a waste of time. And didn't save him from death in the end.

Quote

2) Marsh and Yarwyck are two long serving brothers and though Marsh at least is mildly argumentative there is no indication either is obstructive and neither are as insubordinate or hostile as Thorne and Slynt so there is no real grounds to remove them.  Thorne and Slynt he does send away of course (though Slynt misread the situation) so he actually did the things you are criticising him for not doing.  He can't get rid of every experienced man in the NW, of whom there are only 300 after all, on the grounds of a cryptic vision and warning from Mel and magic up experienced replacements who he can rely on - these people simply don't exist in the threadbare organisation he now leads.  It's why Leathers, a wildling, becomes master at arms.

There is a shortage in competent warriors/rangers due to a lot of losses. But not necessarily in the builders and stewards department. No idea why Jon couldn't get rid of people on the basis of a not-so-cryptic vision. The problem was that he ignored it.

Quote

I particularly like how you say that his enemies will be people he wouldn't suspect but if this is the case the only way to beat the trap is to send everyone away.  Send away Thorne and Slynt and it's Marsh.  Send away Marsh and its some other guys like Whittlestick or whoever.  If you believe in prophecy it's a no win situation.

We know the future can be changed.

Quote

3) Sure, he writes his magic letters and everyone stops warring with each other.  Right.  There are 300 NW so the institution is basically dead.  What he can do is encourage the Stannis-Northern-Wildling-NW confederation to come into effect which is exactly what he does.  Manderly is baking Freys into pies and wants vengeance for his son so a letter about ice zombies isn't going to cut it.

He didn't even try. Your arguments don't help. Excusing Jon for not trying to forge alliances is almost as bad as not doing it. If there are ice demons out there then his damned duty is to do everything in his power to convince people of that. But he doesn't.

Quote

5) Okay, it's not convincing to you.  It is however exactly what Jon / Mel planned or at least how Mance decided to put the plan into action.  If you can't see how Abel, a figure known in the North as a travelling musician, could move about freely and hide Arya among his performers / spearwives without anyone having any idea that Jon / the NW was involved or that Arya had been taken to CB then fair enough.  Seems exactly what they or Mance at least had planned though.

How do you know that Abel is some sort of well-known alias identity? Nothing suggests as much, actually. And why the hell should Mance hide Arya anywhere. If they have not been sent to infiltrate Winterfell and rescue Arya then they would just hang out on the road waiting for her to come to them. Once she arrived they would tell her who they are and take her to Jon. No need for some convoluted scenario the way you are inventing out of thin air here.

Quote

6) No, that's just the only way you seem to be prepared to look at it.  Jon effectively sent a party of 8 warriors to escort Arya back to CB.  If he had sent 8 men of the NW to find her you would probably think it a reasonable escort and suitable protection.  But it points to his involvement wheras this doesn't.

Have you read ADwD? Ramsay Bolton made said connection after he captured Mance Rayder and/or some of said spearwives and flayed them. How is this better than sending a bunch of Watchmen to wait for Arya on the road? Or some of Stannis' men? In fact, it is much worse because the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch is now confirmed to make common cause with an oathbreaker and traitor, the former King-beyond-the-Wall, Mance Rayder. Sending Mance and those wildling women down south doesn't have to be construed as treason it is treason and an act of war.

Quote

7) True the wights can't pass.  But every person left north of the Wall likely becomes a wight so where are you gong with this?  The Marsh argument of leaving them to die and be raised as enemies that realistically will have to be faced sooner or later Wall or no Wall.

The point being that the wight problem might never become an issue (if a miracle happens or the Others don't attack) whereas the shortage of food is a very real problem that might put them in a position not to be able to deal with the wights or the Others when they come. I mean, lets say it is a eight-year-winter and the Others only bestir themselves in the fourth year. How strong will the NW be then?

Quote

8) Jon is not dumb.  Food needs to be secured.  Just because you don't have enough food for the winter for all these people doesn't mean you leave thousands of peole to starve, it means you work on getting more food surely?  You seem to criticise Jon for not having secured enough food already for an eight year winter.  The situation needs time to be remedied and it's bizarrely unreasonable to demand an instant and completely watertight solution to be presented to Marsh for implementation.

Nope. It is stupid to feed more mouths than your stores can support right now when you don't have enough food already to compensate for that. Promises and plans do not feed people. Food does. And right now Jon has no source of new food available. And there is no guarantee that he'll ever get it.

Quote

9) LOL, whatever man.  He doesn't want to involve the NW to leave a trail that points to him and Stannis's men are not his to command whether they happen to be at CB with Mel or at Eastwatch with Selyse and Shireen so he uses Mance with his ready made persona of Abel.

That is just nonsense. Stannis' men at the Wall are Mel's to command. She could have send them instead of the wildlings. The wildlings have been put under Jon's jurisdiction by Stannis for the time being. Stannis' own men weren't. If some queen's men had infiltrated Winterfell things would have been much different.

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Are you kidding? What is Mance responsibility in the Starks Lannisters war?

The Starks and Lannisters are basically responsible for the War of the Five Kings. Okay, Renly and Stannis and Balon are, too, but Ned/Robb and Tywin are basically to blame for the situation in the Riverlands and the North.

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

If Mance had come to Ned or Robert, they would have beheaded him for desertion without listening more than Ned did for Gared. Short of presenting an Other, he could have done nothing. If Leaf or another CotF had come to WF, maybe it would have been different. But apparently, the CotF and BR believed differently, or knew better.

Sure, that would have been a risk. But possibly one worth taking if the survival of humanity is at stake. The whole war thing wasn't of any help, that's for sure.

[BalerionTheCat]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Starks and Lannisters are basically responsible for the War of the Five Kings. Okay, Renly and Stannis and Balon are, too, but Ned/Robb and Tywin are basically to blame for the situation in the Riverlands and the North.

Sure, that would have been a risk. But possibly one worth taking if the survival of humanity is at stake. The whole war thing wasn't of any help, that's for sure.

So, Mance has no responsibility in the 7K troubles.

Maybe he came to WF with the idea to negotiate with Robert. He probably didn't come just by idle curiosity. But seeing how a big fat cow Robert was. And maybe some stories about Ned beheading a NW deserter, despite his telling of Others. He decided it was stupid. He knew the Wildling alliance would break apart without him, and they would then be definitively lost.

[the trees have eyes]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

1) I just don't like it very much. It is a waste of time. And didn't save him from death in the end.

2) There is a shortage in competent warriors/rangers due to a lot of losses. But not necessarily in the builders and stewards department. No idea why Jon couldn't get rid of people on the basis of a not-so-cryptic vision. The problem was that he ignored it.

3) We know the future can be changed.

4) He didn't even try. Your arguments don't help. Excusing Jon for not trying to forge alliances is almost as bad as not doing it. If there are ice demons out there then his damned duty is to do everything in his power to convince people of that. But he doesn't.

5) How do you know that Abel is some sort of well-known alias identity? Nothing suggests as much, actually. And why the hell should Mance hide Arya anywhere. If they have not been sent to infiltrate Winterfell and rescue Arya then they would just hang out on the road waiting for her to come to them. Once she arrived they would tell her who they are and take her to Jon. No need for some convoluted scenario the way you are inventing out of thin air here.

6) Have you read ADwD? Ramsay Bolton made said connection after he captured Mance Rayder and/or some of said spearwives and flayed them. How is this better than sending a bunch of Watchmen to wait for Arya on the road? Or some of Stannis' men? In fact, it is much worse because the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch is now confirmed to make common cause with an oathbreaker and traitor, the former King-beyond-the-Wall, Mance Rayder. Sending Mance and those wildling women down south doesn't have to be construed as treason it is treason and an act of war.

7) The point being that the wight problem might never become an issue (if a miracle happens or the Others don't attack) whereas the shortage of food is a very real problem that might put them in a position not to be able to deal with the wights or the Others when they come. I mean, lets say it is a eight-year-winter and the Others only bestir themselves in the fourth year. How strong will the NW be then?

Nope. It is stupid to feed more mouths than your stores can support right now when you don't have enough food already to compensate for that. Promises and plans do not feed people. Food does. And right now Jon has no source of new food available. And there is no guarantee that he'll ever get it.

That is just nonsense. Stannis' men at the Wall are Mel's to command. She could have send them instead of the wildlings. The wildlings have been put under Jon's jurisdiction by Stannis for the time being. Stannis' own men weren't. If some queen's men had infiltrated Winterfell things would have been much different.

The Starks and Lannisters are basically responsible for the War of the Five Kings. Okay, Renly and Stannis and Balon are, too, but Ned/Robb and Tywin are basically to blame for the situation in the Riverlands and the North.

Sure, that would have been a risk. But possibly one worth taking if the survival of humanity is at stake. The whole war thing wasn't of any help, that's for sure.

1) Well, that's honest but its a weird thing to be so intent on criticising him over.  For the record I'm not sure anyone's combat skills protect them from betrayal and assassination.  It's called the Ides of Marsh for a reason.

2) And neither Marsh not Yarwyck have done anything to warrant being replaced.  He sent away both Slynt (with Longclaw) and Thorne, the two most obvious troublemakers and open challengers of his authority.  The idea that he should have purged the entire NW leadership is one we will have to differ on as is the idea that he could easily have found competent replacements for those senior officers.  The one obvious replacement for a senior officer with a Jon loyalist - Sam for Aemon - is years in the making, not your instant fix so we will have to agree to differ here too.

3) Ok.  So it doesn't matter if he replaces the officers or not or sends lots of people away because first, the daggers will come from those he does not suspect and second, he can avoid the fate Mel warned him about.  You seem to have argued against yourself here.

4) Jon put a lot of time and effort into alliances as you well know.  You can criticise him for not trying to make an alliance with the Boltons, that's certainly valid, but I consider it unrealistic and ultimately futile as he has nothing they want (other than his life).

5) Mance tells us himself that he has travelled a lot in the North as Abel so it's a reasonable inference whether this bothers you or not.  And the scenario I posited for the spearwives isn't pulled out of thin air it's a simple idea of a contingency plan.  You know "Plan for the best, prepare for the worst".  I shouldn't have to explain this really.  You are free to hold an opinion and I guess we'll agree to disagree again.

6) No I haven't read ADWD at all mate.  Any other dickish questions?  The beyond obvious point that shouldn't need to be explained is that Mance & co were not supposed to be caught and tortured!  Once that happens, no, it really doesn't matter who you sent does it?  But if they are seen at some point but not caught nothing points back to you.  That is so straightforward I don't see why you even bother to argue over it.

7) Ok, so you are Bowen Marsh.  We have been over this so many times that it feels stale.  You won't accept anything other than Jon having a completely watertight solution in place to feed a large but undefined number of people for a large but indefinite amount of time - what 1 year, 2 years, 10 years - and hide behind that to criticise him.  Perhaps you should read the books where he outlines how he intends to deal with that problem rather than assuming he simply didn't and wouldn't be able to do anything other than starve.  Give me someone with initiative and energy and ideas rather than a timid defeatist any day of the week.

8) Please make sense.  Neither Jon nor Mel wants to send Stormland knights or footsoldiers who will stand out like a sore thumb whatever the cloaks they wear compared to a singer with his washerwomen, not to mention this singer knows the North while the southerners don't.  And stop saying "nonsense" when you happen to be holding a different opinion over a very small point, it's really a bit silly.

[Maia]

On 17.7.2016 at 1:02 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

The whole point of Jon's arc seems to me to reveal to us that valuing blind oaths and honor over your loyalty to your loved ones is wrong. Ned showed that to us. And the absurdity of the Watch's oaths seems to demonstrate quite clearly that forsaking a wife, children and family in exchange for some oath is unnatural and should be rejected by any sane human being.

 

Not to me, sorry. To me the whole point of Jon's arc is that it is difficult to do your duty, to put the greater good over personal considerations, even when you know beyond shadow of doubt that lots of people will die if you fail. There are also the matters of distinguishing between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and of trying to pick the lesser evil. And Jon has some successes with all of the above, but also some fateful failures. IMHO, YMMV.

And if NW oaths are so absurd, how come that wildlings are running with their tails between their legs, to hide behind the Wall that NW had built and maintained - _because_ of their vows? How come that the wildlings, who allegedly remember things that Westerosi have forgotten, can do zip against the Others? After all, they have known long before the NW that the Others were stirring - years, if we are to believe that that's what prompted Mance to become the King beyond the Wall. Heck, they knew that the Others weren't truly gone the whole time. And what do they have to show for it? Nothing. 

 

On 17.7.2016 at 1:02 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

I can swear an oath to serve my country tomorrow, but if I have to choose between my country and my wife or child my honor can get screwed. That is what makes us human. And real.

 

Well, I hope that you aren't in any profession where people count on you for protection, then, since you are so ready to betray them for personal reasons. But Jon did chose to enter such an occupation, so...

 

On 17.7.2016 at 1:02 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

The Watch lost the plot over the millenia. Oaths to father no children almost certainly originated with the discovery that the Others use human children to create more of themselves, like with Craster's sons. Maybe fathering children in Other infested territory was strategically unsound. But to apply that to one's whole life is ridiculous.

 

No, it originated from the fact that taking care of and supporting families would have distracted the watchmen from their duty and consumed all their resources, not to mention the chaos that it would have caused in succession of the families that the (noble) watchmen come from. Oh, and also it would have led to the attempts to divide the Gift and the castles into hereditary holdings, no different from other lordships. Something that had happened a few times anyway, people being people, but with official families it would have actually succeeded. As a result, the Others would have been able to roll over them with as little resistance as they got from the wildlings. And  likely much sooner than the beginning of the series.

 

On 17.7.2016 at 6:51 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

Or maybe Jon instinctively (or prophetically) senses that a North not ruled by the Starks means the War against the Others is lost. And that by helping Stannis this is the only way that something like that can still transpire.

We are yet to learn the significance of "there must always be a Stark in Winterfell". I know you likely dismiss it as a side issue, not worthy of the attention focused on Daenerys the Saviour's arrival. But many believe that this is key to humanity's survival.

 

But how does this compute with oaths being evil and how everybody should look after their own families first? After all, Stark leadership of the North is based on oaths of their vassals and on the expectation that in certain circumstances those vassals would put Stark well-being and obedience to their commands above their own interests and those of their families? Or is it that oaths given _by_ the Starks are evil and unnatural and should be dismissed, but those given _to_ them are sacred and neccessary? .

 

[Maia]

On 17.7.2016 at 8:23 PM, the trees have eyes said:

 And Stannis intends to win the loyalty of the North whether he has Jon's permission or support or not.  So is it Jon's reponse to the pink letter you disagre with or do you expect him to stop all of the above with a speech and a letter or two?

 

My problem with Jon's policy so far is that he seems to have gone all in on Stannis and as a result if Stannis fails, then the realms of men _and_ the wildlings Jon brought over can go hang, because the Boltons and the other northern lords have been given no reason to take the threat of the Others seriously. What Jon could have done? He could have demanded that Tormund's people bring him a wight or 2 or parts of them as part of the price for the crossing. And then he should have sent messengers out  with this proof in addition to his letters*. It was his job to try to prevent/delay Othercalypse no matter who wins the North and he didn't even bother with contingencies - because it would have meant dealing with the people he hates. That's a major fail in my book.

* Yes, the Old Bear tried this with the Lannisters, but combination of personal conflict between Thorne and Tyrion as well as Ser Alliser's own inimitable personality ensured that the wight hand wasn't seen by anybody of importance in KL - or even anybody at all. But the idea was still good and with winter here, the wight parts can certainly keep for much longer without rotting.

 

On 17.7.2016 at 8:23 PM, the trees have eyes said:

Hardhome is a risky move I'll give you that.  The ships seem lost and any ground force would be in real trouble to. 

 

And yet, Jon intended to send what remained of NW at Castle Black and a large chunk of their remaining provision and horses on this suicide mission. What is more, he didn't even think to send at least one ship to Braavos, so that the work to arrange food shipments could begin immediately. In another thread much has been made of the difficulty of overland transport of foodstuffs. Well, it is the  whole way overland from Eastwatch to the Shadow Tower. A few months to supply everybody at least and that's once the ships reach Eastwatch in the first place.

Personally, I think that sending ships on a look-see mission wasn't a bad idea in principle, but Jon shouldn't have sent all at once and the follow-up was seriously botched.

 

On 17.7.2016 at 8:23 PM, the trees have eyes said:

Jon killed the boy to beome the man.  Maybe Aemon's advice was bad but sending his friends away so he would appear less the boy commander doesn't seem a bad plan to me. 

But he didn't. He still thought that he was a hero who could save everybody. One of the hardest lessons a ruler needs to learn is when to bow to reality and cut his losses. Not to give up to easily, but also not to persist in a hopeless endeavior beyond all reason. Hence Dany - Jon contrast, both of whom failed at leadership in 2 different ways. Dany compromising her vision too much and Jon not at all. Aemon's advice was actually excellent. 

As to Pyp and Grenn, Jon was right to send them away. But not Iron Emmet. I mean, NW has beaten the wildlings again and again due to superior training and discipline.  And what  did Jon do? He sent away an excellent master-at-arms and named a wildling, who had been in NW for a couple of months or so in his place! This was very stupid, because not only did Jon thus ensure that the training of new recruits suffered, he also removed all people with possible leadership potential who saw him favorably from Castle Black. Thus ensuring that there would be nobody to pick up any slack or give him advice.  Not to mention that Leathers was needed to ride herd on Wun-Wun and both of them should have been put doing something constructive, to justify expedenture of all that food on giant. Marsh and Yarwick may have refused him - and really, it does now seem that it would have been unwise to accept him without  Leathers, but Jon could have ordered them to do something helpful - like cutting firewood. It is one thing to _say_ that a giant could be used for tasks, it is another to demonstrate it.

Mance's identity as a singer was irrelevant, since he wasn't supposed to go anywhere near settlements or people. 

 

On 17.7.2016 at 8:23 PM, the trees have eyes said:

The Weeper might not care about hostages but what about his men?  The point is it's a move borne out of desparation nd necessity because however loathsome the Weeper is his men are more useful alive and fighting the Others than attacking the NW as either wildling raiders or wights.

 

Taking hostages and even executing them (which we all know Jon couldn't have done)  didn't stop the Ironborn until after 2 dozens of raids during one of their conflicts with the Lannisters according to TWoIaF. It would take just one to raise the northeners against the wildlings - all of them Jon let in, not just the Weeper. So, no, his men aren't necessarily more useful alive.