Jon Cannot Be Angry With Sansa

[Les Météores D]

They both screwed up. That doesn't make them garbage incompetent battle commander or backstabbing LF-wannabee. 

[PirateVergo]

Sansa apologists need to stop lying to themselves really.

None of what she did was good, Jon can be pissed off at her, she can't be pissed at him because he did her no wrong.

What Sansa did was basically betrayal, good thing for her that Jon is nothing more than a bastard deserter with no claim while she has Littlefinger on her side.

[Chib]

14 minutes ago, PirateVergo said:

Sansa apologists need to stop lying to themselves really.

None of what she did was good, Jon can be pissed off at her, she can't be pissed at him because he did her no wrong.

What Sansa did was basically betrayal, good thing for her that Jon is nothing more than a basatard deserter with no claim while she has Littlefinger on her side.

But Jon and his supporters broke the gate first, so technically Winterfell was his to take down. In war time, legitimate kids might not mean as much as force. Jon used force to get Winterfell and he got that. The North would want to vote for Jon. 

[DarkerStar]

Did Sansa ever tell Jon what kind of games Ramsey likes to play. You know like specific things that he did to her or Theon. You know the giving you false hope only to snatch it all away. Instead of pouting she could have given him actual useful information. Didn't the crown give LF permission to go retake the North for them? Isn't that essentially what he has done here?

[sweetsunray]

Not to mention that Sansa, who has no special recon skills, was able to find that Vale army quite fine enough. Unless Vale army teleported from Moat Cailin, obviously they were very nearby the night before for a good recon party (such as the Wildlings) to search and meet with them and plan accordingly. 

[Quyen Thuy Tran]

4 hours ago, messem said:

I strongly disagree. The Sansa fans here postulate now for years that she will become a player. I always doubted that but Sansa let the her little brother (the rightful heir to Winterfell aka the King in the North) die to become the Lady of Winterfell. That was a cold play. Well played Sansa.

Illogical in the sense that she doesn't seem to get that this is battle, this is life and death. She need Jon and his supporters alive as much as possible because if they're all dead. Vale could still help her but they will turn her into their pawn to rule the North. Without Jon and an army even though it's small, Sansa would be just thrown around and round by Vale and LF again. And yet she kept the information from Jon. They're on the same boat now. She needs to share that information because the Starks don't have much left. No supporters, no reasonable army, no political strength, no maester.... They only have the name and it doesn't even mean much. Bran even if he comes back, who will take a cripped boy seriously? Only Jon she could rely on now. If she want Jon and the wildings do suicide mission for her, she must tell Jon everything. 

[Roboginger]

what a crock of a topic.

 

[Red Tiger]

3 hours ago, DarkerStar said:

Did Sansa ever tell Jon what kind of games Ramsey likes to play. You know like specific things that he did to her or Theon. You know the giving you false hope only to snatch it all away. Instead of pouting she could have given him actual useful information.

How would this information have helped him on the battlefield?

[Arya_Stormborn]

What if Littlefinger was the one who told Sansa not to tell Jon about their plans? As in, "I'll bring my forces to help you, but only if you agree not to tell Jon because of ______________ (insert Littlefinger-ish reason here)." I can see her being conflicted about what to do in a situation such as that.

Bottom line, it's far more upsetting to me when the show introduces plot points that are downright impossible (i.e. Arya's miraculous and unexplained recovery from her fatal injury) than it is when the show introduces elements that might seem implausible but are still within the realm of possibility. Sansa is young and inexperienced in the ways of war, and there are obviously convincing arguments to be made in favor of both sides of the dilemma in which she found herself (tell Jon, don't tell Jon). It may be that she made the wrong decision, but I don't find it totally implausible that she might have made that decision, even assuming that her intentions were good.

[Jedi Renee]

On 21/06/2016 at 2:25 AM, LadyAlisande said:

I don't think that's how Sansa sees Jon. Quite the contrary. She thinks of him as naive and innocent and noble to a fault. He doesn't understand how to play politics. If she had presented Littlefinger's offer and laid all her cards on the table, Jon likely would have refused Littlefinger's assistance on moral grounds; he's an unsavory type Jon would not trust. Though sharing his concerns on that, Sansa could see that winning was more important. She didn't withhold the information because she doesn't trust Jon; rather, she knew exactly what his decision would've been, and felt it would've been wrong. And she was right.

I think if she told Jon at the war council davos could of helped in working out a plan too. John is naive but that's no excuse to not trust him and with hold valuble info that could of saved so many lives that are needed for the bigger fight against the ww

[Mladen]

3 minutes ago, Jedi Renee said:

I think if she told Jon at the war council davos could of helped in working out a plan too. John is naive but that's no excuse to not trust him and with hold valuble info that could of saved so many lives that are needed for the bigger fight against the ww

So, what would be the plan? Play defensive until Vale armies arrive? Wasn't that the plan the whole time that was changed when the commander, Jon Snow, decided to charge against cavalry.

Simply, I don't see them having a great fight... 

[Davrum]

7 hours ago, PirateVergo said:

Sansa apologists need to stop lying to themselves really.

None of what she did was good, Jon can be pissed off at her, she can't be pissed at him because he did her no wrong.

What Sansa did was basically betrayal, good thing for her that Jon is nothing more than a bastard deserter with no claim while she has Littlefinger on her side.

Sansa has clearly gone to the dark side. The coldness with which she dismissed the idea of rescuing her little brother was a massive clue to that. Her dismissal of her half-brother's promise to protect her showed she had no respect for his ability (he already got himself killed once, after all).

And she told him she would be dead if the battle was lost, and yet he threw what he believed to be his best chances at victory, and her salvation, under the bus when he chose to charge (rather than scoop Rickon up and ride him back to Mel asap like an intelligent half-brother would have done). Jon abandoned her when he made that move. To claim he did her no wrong is to fundamentally misunderstand the episode.

Nobody has to like Sansa for what she did, but she played the game far more intelligently than Jon and Ramsay did. Calling her stupid is missing all the clues.

[DarkerStar]

3 hours ago, Red Tiger said:

How would this information have helped him on the battlefield?

Maybe he recognizes the trap Ramsey was setting.

[Red Tiger]

20 minutes ago, DarkerStar said:

Maybe he recognizes the trap Ramsey was setting.

I guess.

[LordPathera]

17 hours ago, Ice Spider said:

I have just as much right to call your assumptions nonsense as you do mine. your overall analysis is incredibly short sighted and idealistic. Yes, it was wrong to drop the nuclear bomb on yagisaki and Hiroshima, but in the long run, it most likely saved lives to do so. You and others don't seem to grasp the bigger picture here, and it's not just about the BOB, but rather the fight that is yet to come. In order to accomplish ALL the objectives, Ramsay had to be drawn outside of WF, end of story. A siege would have left winterfell battered, burned, and broken, Casualties would have been every bit as high, if not higher, and WF would have been useless in the battle against the others.

If being idealistic means expecting loving family members to trust and not deceive, manipulate and omit important information from each other, then I'll wear it as a badge of honor.

Pointless False Equivalency. The atomic bombings were done against a known enemy for the (official) sake of ending a long and bloody war as quickly as possible.

Telling Jon about the Vale does nothing to hinder the objectives that you've brought up. In fact, it gives him more room for a worthwhile strategy that doesn't pointlessly get his small army killed. He can still draw out Ramsey into a battle of his choosing with terrain that better benefits his forces (Wolfswood for example) and allow Jon to hold off Ramsey long enough for the Vale to arrive.

For example: Since Ramsey is apparently drawing all of his forces at Winterfell, Jon could choose to attack the under-defended Dreadfort instead. As the Dreadfort is the historical home of House Bolton, it would have symbolic value for Ramsey's people and for Ramsey himself. Support and trust in Ramsey's capabilities as leader would decline for as long as Ramsey does not challenge Jon. Ramsey would be forced to march out to retake the Dreadfort while Jon is free to either meet him on a field of his choosing, use the experienced wildling raiders to plunder and harass Ramsey's march and supply routes, or wait at the Dreadfort and coordinate with the Vale knights to smash the Bolton coalition against the walls of their own keep.

Ramsey's killed/captured; the Boltons beaten; Winterfell ripe for retaking; far less people in Jon's army die; and folk like Rickon and Wun Wun might still be alive.

When making a strategy and what tactics to apply, a good commander doesn't pick and choose which to take into account. Every asset, fact, and etc. has to be considered in order to create a winning plan. But if important-need-to-know information is withheld for no justifiable reason, then the commander is going to be blind to something really good or bad, and a good commander should minimize moments of blindness.

How different would Waterloo have been if Wellington didn't know that the Prussians were on their way? Waterloo was chosen because it was an ideal defensive position that could blunt Napoleon's offensive power and allow Wellington's admittedly inexperienced and overall green army to hold of Napoleon's larger and more experienced army long enough for the Prussians to arrive and deal the coup de grace. If Wellington didn't know about the Prussians, he'd probably choose to retreat further north, allowing Napoleon to mop up the Prussians and then pursue Wellington or other coalition armies before they could unite and defeat the French Emperor.

By choosing to keep Jon in the dark, Sansa blinded Jon to other opportunities for a chance at defeating Ramsey and saving their little brother and again, what reason did Sansa have for not trusting Jon when Jon's given her no reason not to trust him? Whatever, that reason was, it does not excuse her actions.

Speaking of the Battle with the Others, Sansa's omission of key information and distrust of Jon almost got Jon and the wildlings slaughtered. You know...the people who have THE MOST EXPERIENCE WITH FIGHTING AND ENCOUNTERING THE WHITE WALKERS? AND SANSA WILLINGLY LET THEM FLY INTO A BATTLE BLINDLY WITHOUT INFORMING THEM THAT MUCH NEEDED HELP WAS ON IT'S WAY? Now the realm has less people capable of preparing those able and willing to help for the Long Night and Jon was almost among the dead, himself.

In fact, what if Sansa's gamble didn't work?

What if LF betrayed her like he did before by handing her over to the Boltons to be raped and tortured? Or how her aunt was betrayed? Her uncle-in-law? Her mother? Her father? Doe she have any reason to trust LF to actually save the day and not screw her over?

In fact, based on LF's track record, trusting him has just as much of a chance of screwing over the North as it does saving it and even if LF does help the North, it's only for his own ambitions. I fact, both Sansa and the audience knows what LF is capable of and what he has done. It's a incredibly short-sighted and stupid for Sansa to trust LF over her own brother after everything that she knows about the man.

So to summarize the big picture that you think I missed:

1) For no justifiable reason what so ever, Sansa doesn't trust Jon with need-to-know information causing Jon to rush into a hopeless battle where he almost died.

2) She is trusting Westeros' least-trustworthy person to save the day after the man has already betrayed almost everyone that has trusted him before including herself and her own family. It's also really dumb considering that she earlier had a chance to kill him or accept his help and declined either option only to back-peddle later.

3) Just because Sansa's stunt "happened" to work out, that doesn't change that what she did was wrong, unnecessary, a high gamble that had more reason to fail than succeed and demonstrates that she's on the road to becoming the very people who tore apart and murdered her family. And that's saying something considering that earlier in the story, she betrayed her family twice at the Ruby Ford and King's Landing and her character development seems to be making her into a worst character than the selfish brat she was at the beginning.

4) If Jon can't trust Sansa to trust him, then how can he or anyone else trust her when the Long Night comes? Backstabbers and untrustworthy folk are the last thing that you want beside you when facing an army of wights led by white walkers and Night's King.

5) The notion that Sansa's actions are for the greater good are nonsense because as I said in point 1, there is no reason for her to not tell Jon. She had plenty of chances to tell Jon and knowingly/willingly choose not to say anything. She just acted as commander contrarian even though she has no experience or training in military command, combat or tactics/strategy and didn't even have anything meaningful to offer.

Except for that small piece of important information that she choose to keep from him for no reason.

[Ice Spider]

Your scenario still imposes a long drawn out affair. Attacking the dread fort? Really? Come on man!

[AngelicaDHO]

I think that no matter what information Jon had before the battle he would still have fallen for the trap, under any circumstances. He is not the kind of guy that would have left Rickon to die without trying to save him.

[LordPathera]

16 minutes ago, Ice Spider said:

Your scenario still imposes a long drawn out affair. Attacking the dread fort? Really? Come on man!

It's an example of a viable alternative made available to Jon's planning if Sansa didn't withhold need-to-know information and trust the least trustworthy person in Westeros over her own brother.

[yakisikli123]

Ok Sansa fans, if Sansa wanted only help Jon or wildlings or Rickon, why not attacking Ramsey not with the Vale army at first.

She waited and waited and waited, maybe she thought Jon is dead, she knows Rickon is dead, now without Jon they can kill all the wildlings, then she is queen of betrayers (northeners)

[HighAndMightyBrightness]

5 hours ago, Ice Spider said:

Your scenario still imposes a long drawn out affair. Attacking the dread fort? Really? Come on man!

Well said. What Sansa has actually done is the best for "long-term" situations. More important than the number of Wildlings (who owed Jon their lives anyways and needed quick victories before their depth is forgotten) is the quickness of capturing a relatively undamaged Winterfell and the quickness of eliminating a powerful psychopath before the Long Night.

Using the Dreadfort strategy is simply not a viable alternative; even if things work out perfectly, it requires a much longer time before victory is certain. And Ramsay is a hunter who does not let things work out for his prey, especially when his prey is overconfident and could dismiss any plans. Plans from a former rape victim seems like an easily dismissable one, especially when it involves Littlefinger. If Jon dismisses her idea - which is very likely - then it does not stop there: it also means that she can no longer go against Jon and continue to use Littlefinger. What should she listen to then: Jon's brash commands or her justified instincts. If Jon dismisses her, she is in a no win situation anyways.

Sansa knew many things that Jon does not, and sometimes the only way for plans to work out is to reveal it at the appropriate moment. Sansa may not be a military person, but she knows how to read people in general. Based on the ways ideas are taken seriously (or not seriously) in Jon's camp, Sansa revealed her strategy at the right time.

Jon's genuineness makes the best bait for Ramsay - and Sansa's basic strategy  is the only viably quick strategy before the approach of the Long Night.

Please LordPrathera, see reason and look at Osha. If Jon was not genuine in his attacks and blunders like Osha was not genuine in her lovemaking, the entire Stark army may have perished.