Jon was rightfully "terminated" by the Watch

[The Commentator]

I do seem to recall George comparing the Others to some disaster coming about as a result of human actions.  I wonder what action that would be.  As much as I greatly dislike Jon, I do not believe it is simply due to his birth and his actions.  The Others could take advantage of his screwups at the wall but that is another matter.  It is likely something that many humans do.  Something that has a widespread impact on the environment.  What are the humans doing that bring the Others?  Is it an environmental issue, like cutting down too many weirwoods?  Maybe the trees keep away the Others like mothballs keep away the moths.  Overpopulation?  Westeros doesn't appear overpopulated to me, but then I am using our modern idea of population density.  It could be crowded when compared to natural sustainability.  Violence?  Is it only victims of violence that can be turned?  Is it slavery?  You could argue that the Others practice slavery when they make use of corpses. 

[cpg2016]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

George himself repeatedly compared the threat of the Others to climate change in the real world. We know it is a thing, but there a people who like to pretend it is not a thing - or that we cannot do anything about it - because it suits their short-term goals (and being human they only live a couple of decades and can afford to literally shit on posterity). But this doesn't mean that the people who know it is a thing should not continue to do anything in their power to convince others that this is really a thing and change the minds of the people who reject it is a thing.

This comparison also shows that the Others are imagined by a George as a threat that pretty much transcends everything. The Others can only be defeated if the people of Westeros (and perhaps even large portions of the population of western Essos) work together. If they don't, they are doomed. The idea that a Watch-wilding-Northmen coalition could defeat the Others is ridiculous.

No one thinks they can.  Jon is looking to deprive his enemy of soldiers via dead wildlings.  Secondarily, he is trying to boost the manpower of the Watch.  All perfectly rational responses.  Bowen Marsh is a shortsighted bigot who would rather let the Others gain an advantage, then get over his prejudices.

And again, tell me what else Jon should have done, or the Watch as a whole, and I'll agree with you.  They inform everyone they can.  They send an emissary, with "evidence" to convince the powers that be.  It all fails, and by the end of the it, they're a little busy fighting wildlings and wights, and then mutineers.  Mind you, it works... Stannis shows up because of those letters.

Quote

A way to go would be to convince a significant lord of the threat and then have him act as your spokesperson to convince others. Davos could have tried to do that when he talked to Lord Manderly. But the Others never even came up. That is not exactly the way to defeat them. Never mentioning them.

Davos does not work for the Watch, he works for Stannis.  You cannot blame Jon for that.  He does what he can; what is sending another letter going to do except waste time and ravens?  This isn't 21st century America.  He has a limited amount of communication he can engage in

Quote

Again, that depends on the question whether a large wight army of tens of thousands of wildlings can become a real threat to the Wall. They don't know that as of yet. And if the Wall is breached or destroyed or circumvented by the Others somehow (say, by freezing the sea or simply have the wights swim or float across the Bay of Ice) then it should not matter whether tens of thousands or merely a few hundred are coming. They will quickly create more of their kind once they have reached the lands south of the Wall.

Why shouldn't they?  The tens of thousands of wildlings were a threat, obviously.  And we know there are ways around the Wall, and through it, that the wights can penetrate (even if the Others can't).  Soo.... not really a question.  We know they can be a threat to the Wall, both logically and because the Brothers of the Night's Watch think so!  If Jon and everyone is concerned, which we know they are, then we should be too.

And the fact that they'll create hundreds of thousands more is not a good excuse to gift them tens of thousands now.

Quote

1. Mance and his wildlings came as a threat both to the NW and the Seven Kingdoms. They wanted to breach the Wall and kill all the crows and subsequently take lands, food, and resources from the Northmen and the other people of the Seven Kingdoms. That qualifies as an act of war.

Pretty sure this isn't true.  Mance is looking for refuge (hence why he doesn't blow the Horn of Joramun, or what he believes to be the Horn of Joramun, right off), not conquest.  Look at Tormund, who accepts all Jon's strictures.  The only difference in attitude is that Mance has a stronger bargaining position.

Quote

2. More importantly, the threat the NW faces is not a mortal enemy. It is a supernatural threat that may threat humanity. The duty of the NW is to fight that supernatural enemy, and they are not supposed care about any individual people while they are fighting against that enemy. That is why they wear no crowns, win no glory, and father no children. If they have to kill or allow hundreds or thousands to die to save humanity or defeat the ancient enemy then that's what they are supposed to do.

OK.  Which is relevant, how?  Jon is not saving the wildlings because he pities them; he is doing explicitly because every one that dies becomes a soldier in the army of the dead, and every one that lives is a soldier for the living (however ineffective).  So you'll have to point out to me why any of this negates the underlying point: the mutineers want to depose and likely kill Jon because of the actions that are benefiting the mission of the NW.  Jon is very explicit, to the point where there can be no confusion, about his reasons for letting the wildlings through.  He tells Bowen Marsh straight up why.  And guess what?  Bowen Marsh doesn't care, because to him, aiding the wildlings is a worse sin than gifting the Others tens of thousands of wights.  That is his prejudice, endangering the mission of the Watch, he he's willing to mutiny to do it, which makes it worse!

Quote

You have still not proven that this is the case. It is still quite likely that Marsh and his cabal read the Pink Letter in advance and then made plans to kill Lord Snow should he declare war on Ramsay Bolton.

Why is that likely?  Jon notes the seal is unbroken when he sees the letter.  It's certainly possible, but we also know Ghost is acting uneasy, and given the supernatural qualities surrounding the direwolves, that also seems suspicious (though hardly evidence).

But again... your theory is that Clydas opens the Pink Letter, immediately finds Bowen Marsh, who immediately manages to find the precise three or four other men in the Watch willing to mutiny and kill their Lord Commander, and doesn't manage to accidentally tell one brother who might be loyal to Jon?  Give me a break.  We have no evidence that Jon wasn't the first person to read the Pink Letter.  It suspends all disbelief that Bowen Marsh can pull together a mutiny in the space of about an hour.

Far more likely is that Bowen Marsh is planning a coup in advance, which is why he knows exactly who to talk to to find co-conspirators.  The Pink Letter provides something of a pretext (though Ramsay is intervening in the affairs of the Night's Watch, illegally I might add, so Jon has some pretext for his response), and moreover signals that the conspiracy cannot wait, or Jon will be out of their hands and safe.

Quote

A murder that is just contemplated isn't a crime. When they killed him he was a deserter and therefore they did the right thing. If I contemplated your murder for quite some time only to eventually kill you in self defense or to save another person from being killed by you I'd still not be a murderer despite the fact that I was willing to become one.

What a dumb analogy.  If you were plotting to kill me, and then saw me rob a store or something, and gunned me down, your previous intent would absolutely count against you in a court.  There is a reason why murder and manslaughter are different charges; premeditation matters.  A lot.  And Bowen Marsh isn't just nursing grievances; he is actively seeking out others to aid him!

Quote

Correct, but you can only make that comparison if you know for a fact that the Hardhome wildlings would have reached the Wall along with the men sent there. If it worked, and if there was enough food to feed the wildlings and the men of the Watch it would have been (possibly) a reasonable plan. But even then it would have been very risky.

No, you weight the costs and potential consequences.  Jon knows it is a risky mission, but he's weighing the lives of a few hundred of his men against thousands if not tens of thousands of potential wights.  And I was referring to the wildlings as a whole, mainly Tormund but also the Weeper and all them, not just thre Hardhome refugees.  Bowen Marsh is pissed about Tormund too, not just the Hardhome expedition.

Quote

If a majority of the wildlings would be willing to properly man the Wall and do their duty there they certainly could be an asset. But then, this is where their mentality and the food problem comes in. Men manning the Wall need more food than people sitting on their asses doing nothing. And the stores of the Watch are laid out for about a thousand Watchmen, give or take. Stannis already took a lot of their provisions, and then Jon began to hand more food to the prisoners Stannis left at the Wall. Tormund's people are than added to those. If the Others were to attack tomorrow this would be a pretty good strategy. But if they bide their time for another year or even more it was the wrong decision.

Well, Jon thinks of that too.  He borrows money from the Iron Bank and also is presumably selling all the assets he confiscated from the wildlings.

And we have no evidence that the Others are "biding their time".  It doesn't really make sense for them to do so; the more time they wait, the more likely it is that the Kingdoms as a whole have time to prepare (depends on how much intel the Others have about what is south of the Wall).  Don't ascribe them knowledge or motivations they don't have.  All we know is they are coming south, can raise the dead, and cannot pass the Wall (though the Wights can).  That is all Jon knows, as well.  So his actions are perfectly reasonable.  Save as many wildlings as possible, because otherwise they become wights.  Man the Wall, so that no weak points are exposed.  Gather dragonglass, the only thing he knows can kill and Other.  Ask for help.

He does all of those things.  Literally every one.  There isn't a single further action he could take to better prepare the Watch in the time he has.  If so, name it.  Yes, maybe he can send a bunch more ravens, but common sense dictates they will be ignored yet again.

In fact, his best bet, technically speaking, is to aid Stannis in every way possible, since he is the only person in a position of authority who understands the threat.

Quote

That is an exaggeration. I'm pretty sure you can kill an Other, too, if you crush him beneath a rock or use comparable force to physically destroy him. Even a conventional fire that burns hot enough might kill an Other, although it should be very difficult to keep it hot enough in an Other's immediate presence. And I'm pretty sure wildfire and dragonfire work even better, but then, the people at the Wall don't have access to either right now.

We don't know that.  The Others aren't afraid of fire, so Jon has no reason to suspect that.  Only things associated with dragons seem to have any effect.  You and I and Jon have ZERO idea whether you can crush an Other with a rock, so you can't blame Jon for sticking with what he knows works.

PS - you aren't "pretty sure".  I'm "pretty sure" Jon is going to be resurrected.  You're completely guessing that a falling rock kills an Other.  And how big of a rock?  Probably not one Jon has thousands of lying around.  If big rocks could kill them, the giants would be having a pretty easy time of it.

[cpg2016]

2 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

I do seem to recall George comparing the Others to some disaster coming about as a result of human actions.  I wonder what action that would be.  As much as I greatly dislike Jon, I do not believe it is simply due to his birth and his actions.  The Others could take advantage of his screwups at the wall but that is another matter.  It is likely something that many humans do.  Something that has a widespread impact on the environment.  What are the humans doing that bring the Others?  Is it an environmental issue, like cutting down too many weirwoods?  Maybe the trees keep away the Others like mothballs keep away the moths.  Overpopulation?  Westeros doesn't appear overpopulated to me, but then I am using our modern idea of population density.  It could be crowded when compared to natural sustainability.  Violence?  Is it only victims of violence that can be turned?  Is it slavery?  You could argue that the Others practice slavery when they make use of corpses. 

You recall wrong.  He said that the political plotline of the ASOIAF is like modern day politicians politicizing climate change, or French politicians being more willing to work with the Nazis than each other.

The point is that people like Cersei and Mace and Renly and Doran (and Bowen Marsh) are more concerned with the game of thrones, rather than the extinction of humanity coming down from the north.  They're all shortsighted and can only see the trees, and miss the forest.

So no, the Others are returning for no reason at all, it seems; it's just because the plot dictates it.  Or rather, the plot is specifically focusing on when the Others return, which isn't quite the same.  You are making a mistake in viewing the Others as having human motivations; they are omnicidal ice demons, nothing more, and their motives are supposed to be inscrutable.  They cannot be reasoned with or bargained with.  Even Craster may not actually be bargaining with them.

But you are right about the slavery, which is why Jon and Dany are both the PTWP.  The parallel, of both fighting a dehumanizing form of slavery, is very obvious and is meant to be.

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-15 at 9:28 AM, Lord Varys said:

Traditions, customs, and laws can change. Once there were two Faith Militant orders in the united realm, and men had the right to volunteer to join their ranks. Until the Targaryens decided to end that. Once the First Night was a thing, now it isn't.

The idea that things have to remain always the same is clearly wrong.

Oh good. Then you should have no issue with Jon taking actions that conflict with these detrimental and prohibitive laws and customs, in order to ensure the prosperity survival of mankind.

On 2017-6-15 at 9:28 AM, Lord Varys said:

They also swear 'to live and die at their posts' and those posts are at the Wall, not down in the south.

Another poster twisting the vows into a literal interpretation in order to support their bias damnation of Jon.

[HallowedMarcus]

On 14/06/2017 at 8:35 AM, Lord Varys said:

As long as there is no proof that Tommen is Cersei's son by Jaime this is irrelevant. The law and the institutions of the Realm care about the facts as they are known, not necessarily as they are or might be. And those facts are that Cersei Lannister's children are the seed of King Robert Baratheon.

   The Realm care about the facts that are known? King Baratheon made Ned Stark write a will. A known fact. Selmy acknowledged it as Robert's Will. A find strange people speaking about Ned's treason like you and others did.

   It was Cersei who committed treason by destroying her husband’s will and putting a non-Baratheon on the Iron Throne.

   She committed treason when she tore up her husband's will. King Baratheon will is law and could only be legally undone by a Great Council. Who the hell is Cersei? Nobody. She was not a member of the small council, she was not the Hand of the King, she was not Regent and her son was a minor.

   Here is what the King told Ned Stark: “You won’t fail me. You rule now.” And his own words to Ned Stark when he (Ned) was writing his will: “I hereby command Eddward of House Stark, Lord of Winterfell and Hand of the King, to serve as Lord Protector and Regent of the Realm upon my death, to rule in my stead, …”.

   Until Joffrey come of age Eddward Stark was the Iron Throne, Ned was the Hand, Ned was the Protector of the Realm, not Joffrey or his mother, Ned was Lord Regent!

   When Ned Stark arrived before Joffrey, he arrived as the Ruler of the Seven Kingdoms, Regent and Protector of the Realm and Hand of the King! He was the Iron Throne and until Joffrey came of age, he was the ruler and all had to obey him. The King’s Guard, the Lord Commander, the Hound and Cersei Lannister had to bow before him and honor him. Even Joffrey, still a minor, was supposed to obey him. As King Robert told Ned, you rule now.

   And what happened to a known fact, what happened to Robert's Will, confirming Eddward Stark as Lord Protector of the Realm by Cersei Lannister own words? It was torn apart. All saw what she did; she tore the letter in pieces after reading herself that Ned was indeed Lord Protector of the Realm. So it was a known fact known to all in that room. Selmy failed as Lord Commander. After Cersei tore up the letter he should immediately have ordered the King's Guard to arrest her for treason. She acknowledged that Robert's Will made Eddward Stark Regent and couldn't give a damn about it. Selmy said "Those were the king's words". Selmy was a failure as LC and after Cersey admitted Ned was indeed Regent and Protector of the Realm and considering that Ned was also the Hand of the King and Joffrey a minor, all in that room knew Ned was supposed to rule and committed treason killing his men and arresting him! It was a known fact to all in that room! They are all traitors to King Robert and his nominated Regent!

 Eddward Stark could have started his rule sending Tommen and his sister to be fostered at Winterfell. They would have no choice but to go with Ned’s daughters to the North. He could have demanded his son to bring Jaime Lannister to Kings Landing.to suffer Justice.

   Because of his honor, mercifully not wanting Cersei;s sons to die because of her treason incestuous acts, he told her to leave King’s Landind with her children.

   Eddward made mistakes without a doubt. He should have Cersei arrested when she confessed him her crimes, called Renly Baratheon and Loras Tyrell and together with his men sized all three (Cersei’s) children. After that send his man to bring King Robert back and then told him what happened. If the ‘accident’ had already happened told him all nevertheless, invoked the King’s Guard with its Commander, the small council and a few others and let them know that Cersei’s children were Jaime’s. That what I would have done.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

Maybe he was morally right but in the wrong legally.

One has to wonder how Benjen Stark would have dealt with certain things if he was in Jon's place. For I think he would have had a good chance getting elected as Lord Commander had he still been around/alive for the election.

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-15 at 9:28 AM, Lord Varys said:

Words are wind, are they not?

Vows are just words, are they not? Jon would have to be a complete moron, and a traitor to all of mankind - quite like the men who attempted to assassinate him - in order to stay true to these vows that he swore. In effect, bending the rules of this vow, was the only way to actually stay true to the oath that he swore. One can technically argue that Jon was a traitorous oath breaker, but in fact, he was the only man of the Nights Watch attempting to live up to the true purpose of the vows he swore. What's the point of staying true to an oath, if doing so results in the exact opposite of what that oath is suppose to accomplish?

[The Hoare]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Vows are just words, are they not? Jon would have to be a complete moron, and a traitor to all of mankind - quite like the men who attempted to assassinate him - in order to stay true to these vows that he swore. In effect, bending the rules of this vow, was the only way to actually stay true to the oath that he swore. One can technically argue that Jon was a traitorous oath breaker, but in fact, he was the only man of the Nights Watch attempting to live up to the true purpose of the vows he swore. What's the point of staying true to an oath, if doing so results in the exact opposite of what that oath is suppose to accomplish?

Attacking the Boltons would not help mankind

[Darkstream]

4 minutes ago, The Hoare said:

Attacking the Boltons would not help mankind

Really? And should Ramsey have a side dish of Jon heart to feast on with his Reek sausage, how effective do you think Jon would be at defending the realms of men from the Others?

Not to mention that yes, any means of getting rid of Ramsey, would be beneficial to man. Just ask Reek, or fArya, or Lady Hornwood, and many, many others.

[The Fattest Leech]

1 hour ago, The Hoare said:

Attacking the Boltons would not help mankind

Well, allowing someone who broke the laws that Jaehaerys set into order isn't right either. Roose broke a "national" law, as opposed to Jon doing what the basis of protecting the realms of men means. And everyone in the story (all the mains) know Arya is a fake. 

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-16 at 10:07 AM, Lord Varys said:

meaning that whoever is left to defend the Wall when they finally make the move will be weaker than they could have been if they had no refugees to feed.

Only, you don't want to acknowledge that Jon had accounted for the lack of resources facing the Watch, and had made arrangements to rectify the situation - seeing as all of the Lords in the South that he's supposed to be so obedient to, didn't give a fuck as to their plight, and requests. Thanks to Jon's foresight and negotiations, the Watch would have been better equipped and fed than it had been in a long time.

The only viable point I can see from your argument is that fewer men would have died at the hands of a greater number of wights, while defending the wall, but at least they would have died with a full belly.

Having hungry men to fight the Others, is better than feeding your enemies with those men.

[The Hoare]

50 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Really? And should Ramsey have a side dish of Jon heart to feast on with his Reek sausage, how effective do you think Jon would be at defending the realms of men from the Others?

Not to mention that yes, any means of getting rid of Ramsey, would be beneficial to man. Just ask Reek, or fArya, or Lady Hornwood, and many, many others.

Ramsay does not rule the North, Roose does.

[Makk]

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The wildlings aren't worth all that much as a fighting force or anything, really. Yarwyck points out that it is rather difficult to use them as builders, reducing the potential to use them as a workforce to make the other castles habitable and strengthen the defenses of the Wall. And one also assumes that they could be used to throw stones on the wights down before the Wall. But that's it.

You kid yourself if you believe Jon (or anyone) is going to be able to lead an army consisting mostly of wildlings against an army of wights in some sort of pitched battle. That would also be very hard with an army consisting of black brothers but they received, more or less, some sort of military training for months or even years. And they know that's their duty. The wildlings don't think in such categories.

If Stannis could cut their host to pieces with as few men as he had then there is no chance that those men stand any chance against the Others. Mance realized that they could not. That's why they tried to hide behind the Wall. And if those ice spiders end up showing up after all everybody is likely to break and run.

There certainly are some good fighters among the wildlings - men like Leathers - but how many of those are in Tormund's group? The majority of them would be women, children, and men who are not really all that good soldierly material.

I never said they could, that is why you need the support of the North and probably the entire continent, which is why the Boltons need to be removed. But the Wildlings are extremely important. The first thing you need to hold any sort of fortification is enough men to man it. Any man, woman, or child no matter how little previous training they have had can watch from the wall and raise the alarm if needed. The Nightwatch previously didn't have that and had closed all but three of the castles. Bit by bit Jon was taking steps to rectify centuries of neglect.

[Darkstream]

35 minutes ago, The Hoare said:

Ramsay does not rule the North, Roose does.

So, what's your point?

Ramsey is an illegitimately, legitimized Bolton, who threatened Jon, and the Watch.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

No one thinks they can.  Jon is looking to deprive his enemy of soldiers via dead wildlings.  Secondarily, he is trying to boost the manpower of the Watch.  All perfectly rational responses.  Bowen Marsh is a shortsighted bigot who would rather let the Others gain an advantage, then get over his prejudices.

Integrating the wildlings they have and offering decent folk like Tormund to cross are good ideas. And yes, I think Marsh is wrong in his assessment that all wildlings are bad and not to be trusted. We know this is wrong. 

But Jon trusts that a suicide mission is going to be a success. He also trusts (without good reason) that there will still be some wildlings to be saved at Hardhome when they get there (if you look on the map you realize it is a rather long distance up there, especially if snowfalls and storms should hit them).

Again, another Hardhome mission by ship could have worked.

Spoiler

There is a reason why they went with that in show...

Any attempt to save thousands of wildlings overland is simply doomed. And it doesn't give Jon any points that he had good intentions in all that. It is a great idea to save people and an even better idea to prevent the Others from getting more wights. But quite honestly, he and Stannis should have come up with that idea immediately after they captured Mance. He could have gone out there and to bring the various tribes back to the Wall.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

And again, tell me what else Jon should have done, or the Watch as a whole, and I'll agree with you.  They inform everyone they can.  They send an emissary, with "evidence" to convince the powers that be.  It all fails, and by the end of the it, they're a little busy fighting wildlings and wights, and then mutineers.  Mind you, it works... Stannis shows up because of those letters.

No, they don't. Jon does nothing to inform anyone about the real threat since he is Lord Commander. Not directly in his chapters nor in short summaries of the stuff that happened in-between. And no, they are not busy fighting anybody in the early chapters of the book, either. They basically hang out and do nothing, and Jon does not fight any war or battle at all until he is killed.

The only sort of emissary Jon sends out is Samwell. But even he has no orders to make a stop at, say, KL to talk with the Tyrells and other Reach lords he could actually know nor has he any orders to inform the Citadel about the things that transpired at the Wall. He ends up informing some people but on his own volition not because the Lord Commander has ordered him to.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Davos does not work for the Watch, he works for Stannis.  You cannot blame Jon for that.  He does what he can; what is sending another letter going to do except waste time and ravens?  This isn't 21st century America.  He has a limited amount of communication he can engage in.

I'm blaming both Stannis and Jon for the same thing here. Davos is just an example. Jon could also have sent wandering crows to some Northern lords to try to inform them. Stannis sends men to the Last Hearth. Why isn't Jon doing that, too?

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Why shouldn't they?  The tens of thousands of wildlings were a threat, obviously.  And we know there are ways around the Wall, and through it, that the wights can penetrate (even if the Others can't).  Soo.... not really a question.  We know they can be a threat to the Wall, both logically and because the Brothers of the Night's Watch think so!  If Jon and everyone is concerned, which we know they are, then we should be too.

Not really. They might be mistaken about their intentions. Jon and everyone don't even know what the Others are nor what they want.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

And the fact that they'll create hundreds of thousands more is not a good excuse to gift them tens of thousands now.

It is, if we are talking about a suicide mission. I'd like to be able to fly, too, but that doesn't make it so. Jon wanted to save those people but it seems he simply can't.

Queen Selyse puts it much better than I ever could after Jon declares his intention to lead the Hardhome mission himself:

Quote

“How bold of you,” said the queen. “We approve. Afterward some bard will make a stirring song about you, no doubt, and we shall have a more prudent lord commander.”

That is both fitting and correct.

And later Mel claims that all the ships Jon has sent are lost and no man will return. If that's true then there is really no hope to get their in time.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Pretty sure this isn't true.  Mance is looking for refuge (hence why he doesn't blow the Horn of Joramun, or what he believes to be the Horn of Joramun, right off), not conquest.  Look at Tormund, who accepts all Jon's strictures.  The only difference in attitude is that Mance has a stronger bargaining position.

I take it then that Jarl and Styr didn't have orders to kill the black brothers at Castle Black and open the gate or the Weeper didn't have orders to draw the remaining black brothers to a battle at the Bridge of Skulls?

This whole thing was a war. Mance never showed up or sent envoys to the Watch, either, trying to convince his former brothers what was going on there. That is perhaps even a larger plot hole than the fact that Jon and Stannis are not informing anybody. Why on earth would Mance not try to reach out to the Old Bear and the others? The Others are the old enemy, the reason why the Night's Watch was formed. Yet Mormont and the others have to piece things together - the wildlings are not trying to inform them about what's going on. And it is actually a plot twist that the wildlings are no in league with the Others or connected to them. If it comes to battle - which it did, thanks to his own plans - many people would die. And from what we know about Mance's character the man never actually hated or despised his former brothers.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

OK.  Which is relevant, how?  Jon is not saving the wildlings because he pities them; he is doing explicitly because every one that dies becomes a soldier in the army of the dead, and every one that lives is a soldier for the living (however ineffective).  So you'll have to point out to me why any of this negates the underlying point: the mutineers want to depose and likely kill Jon because of the actions that are benefiting the mission of the NW.  Jon is very explicit, to the point where there can be no confusion, about his reasons for letting the wildlings through.  He tells Bowen Marsh straight up why.  And guess what?  Bowen Marsh doesn't care, because to him, aiding the wildlings is a worse sin than gifting the Others tens of thousands of wights.  That is his prejudice, endangering the mission of the Watch, he he's willing to mutiny to do it, which makes it worse!

That simply isn't the case. First, Jon does not save any of those wildlings at Hardhome. He just plans to save those. And Marsh goes along with the Tormund idea. He does not oppose that, he supports it however grudgingly. What he has problems with is the Weeper idea and the idea of the Hardhome mission.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Why is that likely?  Jon notes the seal is unbroken when he sees the letter.  It's certainly possible, but we also know Ghost is acting uneasy, and given the supernatural qualities surrounding the direwolves, that also seems suspicious (though hardly evidence).

The Pink Letter has been sealed only with a smear of pink wax, not a button of pink wax as is mentioned for the letters from Ramsay Asha and Jon had received earlier. We also do know that Clydas must have helped Thorne, Slynt, etc. to exchange whatever letters they had with KL, or at least must have enabled them to read letter addressed to Lord Commander Mormont.

A lot of speculation surrounds that smear of pink wax as well as the fact that Jon doesn't mention Ramsay's huge spiky hand. There were people suggesting that the Pink Letter is a forgery made by people in Castle Black based on that (a ridiculous idea in light of the actual contents of the letter) but the idea that Clydas brought the letter to Marsh first once it arrived is not far-fetched at all. Especially in light of fact that it was simply addressed to one bastard. It doesn't take a rocket scientist that this letter most likely contains a severe threat and that, in turn, means that Marsh and his people must know its contents before Jon does so that they can act accordingly.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

But again... your theory is that Clydas opens the Pink Letter, immediately finds Bowen Marsh, who immediately manages to find the precise three or four other men in the Watch willing to mutiny and kill their Lord Commander, and doesn't manage to accidentally tell one brother who might be loyal to Jon?  Give me a break.  We have no evidence that Jon wasn't the first person to read the Pink Letter.  It suspends all disbelief that Bowen Marsh can pull together a mutiny in the space of about an hour.

I never said Bowen had not an influential cabal of people around him that opposed Jon's policies. Of course he did. What I'm doubting is that they had actual plans to kill him before the Pink Letter arrived. Once it came they would have made plans to kill him should he do what he then did. Prior to that they may have had other plans, most notably the idea to simply let him die out there with his expedition force.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Far more likely is that Bowen Marsh is planning a coup in advance, which is why he knows exactly who to talk to to find co-conspirators.  The Pink Letter provides something of a pretext (though Ramsay is intervening in the affairs of the Night's Watch, illegally I might add, so Jon has some pretext for his response), and moreover signals that the conspiracy cannot wait, or Jon will be out of their hands and safe.

Ramsay doesn't do anything illegal. He just writes a letter full of threats and insults. But those threats are connected to certain demands. It is quite clear that Jon and his people won't be harmed if Jon were to meet Ramsay's demands.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

What a dumb analogy.  If you were plotting to kill me, and then saw me rob a store or something, and gunned me down, your previous intent would absolutely count against you in a court.  There is a reason why murder and manslaughter are different charges; premeditation matters.  A lot.  And Bowen Marsh isn't just nursing grievances; he is actively seeking out others to aid him!

I'm talking about the actual deed, not how it might be seen. Hell, it is imaginable that somebody has very real plans to murder somebody with poison and then accidentally ends up in position where he kills the person in another fashion in a way that makes the whole thing not murder but self-defense.

In Jon's case the men may have planned an unjustified murder (i.e. treason) only to end up to be able to execute a former Lord Commander of the Night's Watch who publicly deserted the NW. The former would be a crime the latter wasn't.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

No, you weight the costs and potential consequences.  Jon knows it is a risky mission, but he's weighing the lives of a few hundred of his men against thousands if not tens of thousands of potential wights.  And I was referring to the wildlings as a whole, mainly Tormund but also the Weeper and all them, not just thre Hardhome refugees.  Bowen Marsh is pissed about Tormund too, not just the Hardhome expedition.

He is pissed, but if he had wanted to kill Jon over that he could have killed him before. He was up with him on the Wall when Jon laid out his plans, remember? I daresay Jon's interpretation of the vow got to him. He did not know what to say.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Well, Jon thinks of that too.  He borrows money from the Iron Bank and also is presumably selling all the assets he confiscated from the wildlings.

Again, having plans how to get food isn't the same as actually having food. You cannot eat gold. Jon has no good picture of the situation in the Realm. He doesn't know how bad things are down there. The people in the Riverlands should already need food imports to live through winter, as should regions in the Crownlands (around Duskendale) and the West. The coasts of the Reach are also affected, and soon there will be war in the Stormlands as well.

For Jon's loans to arrive Tycho Nestoris has first to return to Braavos. And if Stannis is dead - as the Pink Letter claims - the man might be dead, too. If Tycho shows up while Jon is dead their deal might have died with Jon. And considering that Jon sent Tycho's ships up to Hardhome it might be the man never returns to Braavos alive even if he came back to Castle Black.

The bottom line is - that is all a huge question mark. Jon doesn't have the means to feed the wildlings as of yet and he may never get them. And if he never gets them he has played into the hands of the Others.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

And we have no evidence that the Others are "biding their time".  It doesn't really make sense for them to do so; the more time they wait, the more likely it is that the Kingdoms as a whole have time to prepare (depends on how much intel the Others have about what is south of the Wall).  Don't ascribe them knowledge or motivations they don't have.  All we know is they are coming south, can raise the dead, and cannot pass the Wall (though the Wights can).  That is all Jon knows, as well.  So his actions are perfectly reasonable.  Save as many wildlings as possible, because otherwise they become wights.  Man the Wall, so that no weak points are exposed.  Gather dragonglass, the only thing he knows can kill and Other.  Ask for help.

The Others sure as hell are biding their time. They lured the Watch out into the haunted forest to decimate them. They used their wights to target the leadership (and no, the wights can't cross the Wall but they can be transported through the Wall by men).

It is also pretty clear that the Others have bided their time at least until now because of the seasons. It is quite clear that they can't come down south in high summer. But in winter their power might be much, much worse. And there is no reason to believe they would want to attack right at the beginning of winter. They could certainly wait another year, or even two, and let cold and starvation do their work for them.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

He does all of those things.  Literally every one.  There isn't a single further action he could take to better prepare the Watch in the time he has.  If so, name it.  Yes, maybe he can send a bunch more ravens, but common sense dictates they will be ignored yet again.

Again, I said it more than once. He. Could. Have. Sent. Some. Envoys. To Winterfell. Or Barrowton. Or White Harbor. Or the lords of the South. 

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

In fact, his best bet, technically speaking, is to aid Stannis in every way possible, since he is the only person in a position of authority who understands the threat.

Aiding Stannis would only be a good bet if Stannis had a chance to win the war. But he doesn't. That means Stannis is a bad bet. What Jon should have done is to use his position as Lord Commander to try to convince Stannis to take, well, a less confrontational approach against the Boltons and essentially everybody in the Seven Kingdoms. Together they could have tried to make the people understand what's going on.

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

We don't know that.  The Others aren't afraid of fire, so Jon has no reason to suspect that.  Only things associated with dragons seem to have any effect.  You and I and Jon have ZERO idea whether you can crush an Other with a rock, so you can't blame Jon for sticking with what he knows works.

Well, they have no proof either that you can't kill them with conventional swords. And perhaps you can do that, too. Those swords don't stand a chance against the magical ice swords of the Others but that doesn't mean that an Other pierced by a sword is going to not be injured or live. They are, in a sense, living creatures. And anything that *lives* can be killed. Killing an Other could be easier than killing a wight (which might be the reason why the Others use the wights as their weapons).

2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

PS - you aren't "pretty sure".  I'm "pretty sure" Jon is going to be resurrected.  You're completely guessing that a falling rock kills an Other.  And how big of a rock?  Probably not one Jon has thousands of lying around.  If big rocks could kill them, the giants would be having a pretty easy time of it.

The giants aren't all that smart. And the Others have magical abilities. But if a foolish Other actually tried to attack a giant without his magical sword or other magical abilities he most likely would quickly get crushed.

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-16 at 1:42 PM, Lord Varys said:

The smart thing would have been to actually try to talk over this whole thing with all the lords of Westeros. And that would have been the duty of the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. He is not supposed to interfere, a fact that could have enabled him to send envoys to all the warring factions, from Dorne to the Wall. But he doesn't even make the attempt to do something like that.

You mean like sending an envoy to King's Landing with proof as to the existence of the Others? Only to be ignored and ridiculed. It would be stupid and irresponsible of Jon to just sit on his ass waiting for the help of any of the ignorant and dismissive Lords of Westeros. When facing imminent doom, the smart thing to do is take any action deemed necessary, regardless whether or not it was the perceived "lawful" or "dutiful" thing to do. 

Jon did do the smart thing, what you propose would be stupid, and unfortunately, he had to deal with the ridiculous attitudes of people who share the same views as you do - nullifying the smart decision he made.

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-16 at 1:57 PM, Free Northman Reborn said:

Let's just settle the technicality, then we can get to what actually matters. Was Jon breaking the technical rules/laws/vows of the Night's Watch? Sure he was. Could Bowen Marsh feel justified in what he did? Again, sure. Was Marsh technically acting lawfully (according to the Night's Watch?) when he murdered his Lord Commander? I guess that could be argued, but it is perhaps a bit more murky.

Now, with that out of the way, here's the bigger issue. Who cares? The Night's Watch consists of about 500 dregs of society at the edge of civilization. Soon to be number closer to zero, once the Wall inevitably falls.

Is Daenerys acting lawfully in all of her actions? Nope. Might makes right where her goals are concerned. Have the Lannisters been acting lawfully over the course of this series? Have the Boltons or Freys? Did Balon Greyjoy act lawfully? How about Euron Greyjoy?

In short, who cares that Jon broke the rules of a bunch of misfits at the edge of the world, when others are overthrowing whole kingdoms, whole civilizations in pursuit of their own ambitions and causes which they believe worthy. At least Jon is trying to act justly to the best of his ability. And acknowledges to himself when he is not able to live up to the ideals his father instilled in him. George did say that Jon is the truest character in the series, after all.

So this debate is pretty meaningless in the bigger scheme of things. It is just a convenient stick used by Jon haters to try and justify their dislike of the character. Pretty much yawn inducing to me.

Jon acted how any sane person would act, if his sister was forcibly married and being raped daily by a sadistic monster like Ramsay Bolton.

Rise up from the dead Jon Snow-Targaryen, and unleash your vengeance on all those who stand against you, I say.

Well said.

Although, I'm not sure how it can be argued that Bowen was acting lawfully when murdering his Lord Commander in cold blood.

[The Fattest Leech]

The show is accurate!!!! 

[cpg2016]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Integrating the wildlings they have and offering decent folk like Tormund to cross are good ideas. And yes, I think Marsh is wrong in his assessment that all wildlings are bad and not to be trusted. We know this is wrong. 

But Jon trusts that a suicide mission is going to be a success. He also trusts (without good reason) that there will still be some wildlings to be saved at Hardhome when they get there (if you look on the map you realize it is a rather long distance up there, especially if snowfalls and storms should hit them).

Well, as Jon says, he either makers his offer to all the wildlings, or none, otherwise none will believe him or trust him.  The wildlings have just as much cultural distrust of the Watch as they do of the wildlings.

And Jon has no reason to think going to Hardhome is a suicide mission.  You are once again confusing our knowledge as readers, with the knowledge the characters in-universe have.

Quote

Any attempt to save thousands of wildlings overland is simply doomed. And it doesn't give Jon any points that he had good intentions in all that. It is a great idea to save people and an even better idea to prevent the Others from getting more wights. But quite honestly, he and Stannis should have come up with that idea immediately after they captured Mance. He could have gone out there and to bring the various tribes back to the Wall.

Wait, why is this any different?  He doesn't even know about the refugees at Hardhome until after Stannis is gone; they're refugees from Stannis' victory at the Wall!  And moreover, it's made pretty clear, IIRC, that Jon going with other wildlings is the key to the plan's success, as otherwise Mother Mole wouldn't trust him.

So no... he couldn't have just gone whenever.  He needed a very specific confluence of circumstances, mainly revolving around having Tormund, a major wildling leader, on his side and supporting the mission.  And Jon just saw a hundred thousand wildlings make it to the Wall with relatively minimal casualties; why should he think the mission will be a suicidal one?  He's also evacuating some by boat.  You are making this argument with the benefit of a reader's knowledge.  

Quote

 

No, they don't. Jon does nothing to inform anyone about the real threat since he is Lord Commander. Not directly in his chapters nor in short summaries of the stuff that happened in-between. And no, they are not busy fighting anybody in the early chapters of the book, either. They basically hang out and do nothing, and Jon does not fight any war or battle at all until he is killed.

The only sort of emissary Jon sends out is Samwell. But even he has no orders to make a stop at, say, KL to talk with the Tyrells and other Reach lords he could actually know nor has he any orders to inform the Citadel about the things that transpired at the Wall. He ends up informing some people but on his own volition not because the Lord Commander has ordered him to.

 

Right, but everyone has already been informed.  Like, if I tell you that there are a lot of homeless people in San Francisco and its a problem, and you ignore it and do nothing... does it really help anyone for me to tell you again?  Especially if, like Jon, I have limited political capital and am already looked on askance by most of the power players in Westeros for my heritage. 

Jon spends his time beefing up his defenses, trying to learn about his enemy in a reasonably scientific manner, and saving as many innocents as possible.  And, technically, helping Stannis, who believes him and could be reasonably expected to help in the future.  Why waste precious resources and time on people who he knows won't help.  As Einstein said, madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Quote

I'm blaming both Stannis and Jon for the same thing here. Davos is just an example. Jon could also have sent wandering crows to some Northern lords to try to inform them. Stannis sends men to the Last Hearth. Why isn't Jon doing that, too?

Because Stannis sends men for a very different purpose.  Again, everyone has been told of what's coming, but no one believes it.  Sending one of his very few able bodied men to go tell someone something they already know is a waste of time.  What happens when that guy comes back from Last Hearth with empty hands?  Jon sends another, different Watchman?  After all, third time's the charm!

Jon has too few men to do too many things.  Stannis has a fair sight more, and a vastly different agenda (in the short term).

Quote

ot really. They might be mistaken about their intentions. Jon and everyone don't even know what the Others are nor what they want.

This isn't really true.  While stories might be considered just stories, at this point Jon and everyone are going on the assumption that all the tales they were told as kids are probably true.

At the very least, they know the interests of the Others are inimical to their own.  They know the Wall was built to stop them.  And they know they can raise the f**king dead!  Now, I don't want to speak outside of the text, but I think in almost all settings we can agree that beings that raise the dead are pretty likely to be evil.

And more than that, Jon has picked up a ton of info (relatively speaking) from Mance and Tormund about the Other's intentions, because the wildlings have been dealing with it for a while.  It's why they start their mass migration in the first place.  In any case, the general acceptance of the men of the Night's Watch makes it perfectly clear that humanity has a pretty decent idea that the Others are unlikely to be friendly.  Doesn't take too much brainpower to know there is a giant 800 foot magical ice wall there for a reason, especially when they know, explicitly, that the Wall was raised against the Others.

Quote

 

That is both fitting and correct.

And later Mel claims that all the ships Jon has sent are lost and no man will return. If that's true then there is really no hope to get their in time.

 

Selyse is wrong about just about everything else she talks about, so I'm not sure why Jon is supposed to trust her?  Ditto Mel, who has already been explicitly wrong about the interpretation of one her visions that she was sure about.

 

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is perhaps even a larger plot hole than the fact that Jon and Stannis are not informing anybody. Why on earth would Mance not try to reach out to the Old Bear and the others? The Others are the old enemy, the reason why the Night's Watch was formed. Yet Mormont and the others have to piece things together - the wildlings are not trying to inform them about what's going on. And it is actually a plot twist that the wildlings are no in league with the Others or connected to them. If it comes to battle - which it did, thanks to his own plans - many people would die. And from what we know about Mance's character the man never actually hated or despised his former brothers.

And why would Mormont believe him?  And moreover, it may very well be that this was Mance's intention, but that he went looking for the Horn of Joramun to strengthen his bargaining position, as he says to Jon.  Our timeline so far is: Mance unites the wildlings, Mance goes looking for the Horn, LC Mormont takes his Great Ranging to follow the wildling host.  While Jon is inflitrating the camp, Mormont's ranging is wiped out, and Mormont subsequently murdered.  We don't know whether Mance sent emissaries to the Wall to get through.

As an aside, I don't disagree that the wildlings would have preferred to get south of the wall and then begin raiding and all that.

After this, the next view we get is the battle.  The wildlings haven't been let through, and they need to get through.  We hear Mance explicitly say their primary aim is refuge, not plunder.  According to the text, that is his motivation.  

Quote

That simply isn't the case. First, Jon does not save any of those wildlings at Hardhome. He just plans to save those. And Marsh goes along with the Tormund idea. He does not oppose that, he supports it however grudgingly. What he has problems with is the Weeper idea and the idea of the Hardhome mission.

Wait, what?  He doesn't "support" anything!  He is actively unhappy about it, the same as the Weeper and Hardhome refugees.  That is almost certainly when he begins his mutiny plot.

All we know for sure is that Marsh has been conspiring since before the Pink Letter, and that he's unhappy about letting wildlings of any stripe through the Wall, and that he thinks he's acting in the best interest of the Watch.

35 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Ramsay doesn't do anything illegal. He just writes a letter full of threats and insults. But those threats are connected to certain demands. It is quite clear that Jon and his people won't be harmed if Jon were to meet Ramsay's demands.

Well he writes a letter full of demands which Jon is not legally obligated to honor, and threatens to attack if his demands aren't met.  Since we KNOW Jon doesn't have Jeyne/Arya, and we can be pretty darn sure Ramsay wouldn't have accepted that answer, this is essentially an assault upon the sovereignty of the NW.  He certainly has no right to demand Val or Reek/Theon, who are independent people who can take refuge where they want.  

If Ramsay demands that Jon swear fealty to him, or else he'll attack, Jon isn't obligated to kneel or be accused of breaking his vows.  Asking the Watch to break the tradition of guest right is basically removing their sovereignty.

39 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Pink Letter has been sealed only with a smear of pink wax, not a button of pink wax as is mentioned for the letters from Ramsay Asha and Jon had received earlier. We also do know that Clydas must have helped Thorne, Slynt, etc. to exchange whatever letters they had with KL, or at least must have enabled them to read letter addressed to Lord Commander Mormont.

A lot of speculation surrounds that smear of pink wax as well as the fact that Jon doesn't mention Ramsay's huge spiky hand. There were people suggesting that the Pink Letter is a forgery made by people in Castle Black based on that (a ridiculous idea in light of the actual contents of the letter) but the idea that Clydas brought the letter to Marsh first once it arrived is not far-fetched at all. Especially in light of fact that it was simply addressed to one bastard. It doesn't take a rocket scientist that this letter most likely contains a severe threat and that, in turn, means that Marsh and his people must know its contents before Jon does so that they can act accordingly.

I am agreeing that this is a possibiltiy.  However, they don't have forever to read it, so no matter what, you're trying to tell me that Bowen Marsh got a whole conspiracy together on what he thinks Jon might do?  Look, the MUCH simpler explanation is that Marsh thinks Jon is betraying the principles of the Night's Watch by letting wildlings through the Wall, and that he's planning to kill/depose Jon because of that, and that he's been scheming for this for some time, which is why he knows exactly who to go to ahead of time to carry out his plot.  Again, even IF the Pink Letter was read beforehand, it clearly hasn't been hanging around for weeks or anything; maybe Jon gets it a couple hours late, even a day, but it still defies belief that Marsh can rustle together this conspiracy without giving it away that quickly.

Quote

I never said Bowen had not an influential cabal of people around him that opposed Jon's policies. Of course he did. What I'm doubting is that they had actual plans to kill him before the Pink Letter arrived. Once it came they would have made plans to kill him should he do what he then did. Prior to that they may have had other plans, most notably the idea to simply let him die out there with his expedition force.

I agree with this.  They were going to let him die or bar the Wall against him if he succeeded.  Either of which is mutiny.

But the entire point of this thread is whether Marsh's conspiracy was justified.  If he was ONLY doing it because of Jon's reaction to the Pink Letter, then yes, he's at least acting somewhat ethically.  But the point is that his intent all along is for Jon to die or be killed.  Intent matters, which you seem to be denying.  You cannot say that Jon's assassination is morally justified if the conspirators were planning to see him dead no matter what!  And they very obviously were.  I think they were waiting for reinforcements from Kings Landing, but that is just speculation on my part.

45 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm talking about the actual deed, not how it might be seen. Hell, it is imaginable that somebody has very real plans to murder somebody with poison and then accidentally ends up in position where he kills the person in another fashion in a way that makes the whole thing not murder but self-defense.

In Jon's case the men may have planned an unjustified murder (i.e. treason) only to end up to be able to execute a former Lord Commander of the Night's Watch who publicly deserted the NW. The former would be a crime the latter wasn't.

If it's self defense, sure, that's different.  This isn't self defense.  If they are planning a mutiny, and they commit a mutiny, then it's a mutiny.  They don't make any accusations about Jon acting against the interests of the Watch; in fact, Jon could easily commit the Watch to attacking Ramsay and have it be perfectly justified.  Again, the only standard to which we can hold Jon's intentions are "will this help against the Others?"  There is a real case to be made in favor of that, after reading the Pink Letter.

There isn't any way around this.  Marsh is plotting Jon's removal, which almost certainly means his death.  If it happened at Hardhome, awesome, and he's less morally culpable, but my guess is his plan is to kill Jon if he comes back.  That cannot be ignored.

In fact, you're making the leap that the Pink Letter motivates his death.  Which doesn't have to be the case (though I agree it's overwhelmingly likely).

Quote

He is pissed, but if he had wanted to kill Jon over that he could have killed him before. He was up with him on the Wall when Jon laid out his plans, remember? I daresay Jon's interpretation of the vow got to him. He did not know what to say.

He doesn't just have to kill Jon, is my point.  He has to discredit him as well.  Jon has plenty of supporters in the Watch, and more than that, there has to be some reason that neutral brothers (not co-conspirators and not partisans of Jon) will accept Bowen Marsh, or someone in his clique, as the new Lord Commander.  Jon is particularly vulnerable when he is assassinated IOTL because he has sent away many of his loyal brothers.

I think Marsh is waiting on the 100 men Cersei is sending to the Wall, who are going there specifically to assassinate Jon, remember!  He acts when he does because it is his last chance, just like Brutus and Cassius choose the Ides of March because Caesar was joining his loyal legions a few days later.

Quote

The bottom line is - that is all a huge question mark. Jon doesn't have the means to feed the wildlings as of yet and he may never get them. And if he never gets them he has played into the hands of the Others.

This whole point is absurd.  Jon has two options; let the wildlings die, KNOWING he'll be fighting them as undead zombies in the future, or let them through, HOPING he'll be able to feed them and he has good reasons to expect he can.  You're a fool if you're argument is "well, he might fail, so he probably just shouldn't do anything".  This is exactly the kind of stupidity that leads to so many problems in the real world.

We know mankind is exacerbating global warming.  But whatever we do might not work, and would cost some money.  I guess we should just go ahead and burn a shitload of coal, am I right?!?!?!

We know that healthcare is broken, but if we try to fix it, it might not work and we might all lose some money.  I guess just let all those poors die in pain, because hey, we don't know if our efforts will work!

This is why Jon is the hero of the story and Bowen Marsh isn't.  Jon overcomes his prejudices to fight a visceral threat to humanity.  Bowen Marsh is so caught up thinking about how he's going to get enough to eat tomorrow that he ignores the fact that he and every other human on the planet (who he has sworn an oath to protect at the cost of his own life, no less, from this exact threat!) might be dead the week after.

Bowen Marsh is a short-sighted traitor to both the Watch and humanity.  As they say, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.  Couldn't be more fitting than his mutinous conspiracy

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

t is also pretty clear that the Others have bided their time at least until now because of the seasons. It is quite clear that they can't come down south in high summer. But in winter their power might be much, much worse. And there is no reason to believe they would want to attack right at the beginning of winter. They could certainly wait another year, or even two, and let cold and starvation do their work for them.

No it isn't.  It is unclear whether the Others bring the cold, or only come during the cold.

In any case, there have been hundreds of previous winters in which they didn't come, so it's not just a matter of winter.  They're active in summer north of the Wall, and the climate isn't so vastly different from the Fist to the Wall.

So no, you couldn't be more wrong.  It isn't clear AT ALL what is motivating the Others.  All we know is they delight in killing humans (they laugh when they kill Waymar Royce), that they can raise the dead, and that they are currently active beyond the Wall.

59 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Again, I said it more than once. He. Could. Have. Sent. Some. Envoys. To Winterfell. Or Barrowton. Or White Harbor. Or the lords of the South.

OK.  And if they didn't respond, send it again?  I get spam emails every damn day and never open them.  

So say it all you want, but it still makes you sound like a moron.  Every single one of those lords has been told the Others are coming.  Every one!!!!!!!!  They all didn't listen.  Now they're all suddenly gonna jump up and say "holy shit, the Others!!"?  Do you even think through these responses?  Give me one reason they would listen now as opposed to before, and I'll give credence to your argument.  Jon is NOT required to just waste his time and energy... because.  All the lords that were going to respond, responded.  For him to waste time and effort after that is irresponsible.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 6/12/2017 at 10:26 PM, The Fattest Leech said:

Jon did not send Mance and the spearwives. Melisandre did, most likely with Stannis' knowing, and Jon could not interfere with the quarrels of southron politics because that is not the job of the LC of the NW.

Jon's allowing that to happen technically violates his duty to execute Mance for desertion. But Mance is more useful alive.