Jump to content

Bowen Marsh was right to remove Jon from office.


Barbrey Dustin

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, HaeSuse said:

5) The issue with women fighting isn't an issue with women fighting. I support a system where women can be soldiers, in our modern world. If they want a gun, and prove they can use, give it to them. The issue is putting women around men sworn to celibacy in combat situations (or at all).

Actually, Jon recognizes that this is an issue.  That is why he segregates the women and sends them to Long Barrow, where they will be somewhat isolated from the rest of the watch.

As for his willingness to accept Wildlings to fight alongside his men, he is severely undermanned.  He needs recruits wherever he can get them.  

I am forced to admit, that from Marsh & Co.'s point of view, there are multiple legitimate problems with Jon.  He is too willing to allow a large influx of Wildlings into the North, without proper consideration of the trouble that is likely to cause.   His willngness to take the likes of the Weeper is a big problem.  He is (from what they know) openly supporting Stannis, which is likely to get them into trouble with the Crown, especially if Stannis is dead.  The fact that Mance is really alive is a definite problem.  And now he is going to war against the son of the Warden of the North.  

While I happen to agree with most of what Jon has done, even I have to admit some of it is problematic.  While I don't support Bowen Marsh and his conspirators, I can certainly understand where he is coming from.  Unfortunately, this attack will likely make the "realms of men" less safe, because Jon is practically the only person in a leadership position who is taking the threat of the Others seriously and is in a position to do something about it.  His absence will likely inhibit this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon was a good LC of the NW because:

- He knows who is the true enemy;

- He is capable of finding allies that can work with the NW (hopefuly) to fight the Others; the Free People;

- He send men and spearwives to man some abandoned castles in the Wall, increasing the defensive capabilities of the Wall;

- He is capable of dealing quite well with an extremly dangerous situation: being the host of Stannis and Melisandre;

But Jon commits one single mistake (not the history with Mance and the spearwives in Winterfell: that is not that important, because very few people know about that mission) that condemns him (and would, in past centuries, make the Stark in Winterfell, calling the bannermen, ride to the Wall and behead the LC of the NW that would make such thing) to an (un)expected death: the LC of the NW riding south to figth against someone, while leaving the Wall vulnerable to an enemy at the gates... and we are not talking about a group of Free Folk, we are talking about the White Walkers and their wights.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lointain said:

Jon was a good LC of the NW because:

- He knows who is the true enemy;

- He is capable of finding allies that can work with the NW (hopefuly) to fight the Others; the Free People;

- He send men and spearwives to man some abandoned castles in the Wall, increasing the defensive capabilities of the Wall;

- He is capable of dealing quite well with an extremly dangerous situation: being the host of Stannis and Melisandre;

But Jon commits one single mistake (not the history with Mance and the spearwives in Winterfell: that is not that important, because very few people know about that mission) that condemns him (and would, in past centuries, make the Stark in Winterfell, calling the bannermen, ride to the Wall and behead the LC of the NW that would make such thing) to an (un)expected death: the LC of the NW riding south to figth against someone, while leaving the Wall vulnerable to an enemy at the gates... and we are not talking about a group of Free Folk, we are talking about the White Walkers and their wights.

 

I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time what other option did he have? Jon could not meet the terms Ramsay offered. It was literally impossible. Fighting Ramsay is just about the only option he has at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time what other option did he have? Jon could not meet the terms Ramsay offered. It was literally impossible. Fighting Ramsay is just about the only option he has at that point.

Send Bowen&Company, with direct orders from the LC of the NW, to talk with Ramsay Bolton and the Warden of the North, to explain the misunderstanding between the Boltons and the NW.

This way, he is not acting against a noble in the Realm and, at the same time, send away people that are trying to undermine his authority, when they have Others at the other side of the Wall.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Lointain said:

Send Bowen&Company, with direct orders from the LC of the NW, to talk with Ramsay Bolton and the Warden of the North, to explain the misunderstanding between the Boltons and the NW.

This way, he is not acting against a noble in the Realm and, at the same time, send away people that are trying to undermine his authority, when they have Others at the other side of the Wall.

 

That would not work under any circumstances. Bowen and co would end up being flayed and sent back to Castle Black in pieces. Ramsay would still attack the watch and Jon would be forced to either fight or roll over and die. By asking for volunteers from among the wildlings, however, Jon gives the rest of the watch deniability if he is beaten and killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

That would not work under any circumstances. Bowen and co would end up being flayed and sent back to Castle Black in pieces. Ramsay would still attack the watch and Jon would be forced to either fight or roll over and die. By asking for volunteers from among the wildlings, however, Jon gives the rest of the watch deniability if he is beaten and killed.

 

Jon always win:

Bowen&Company are dead, no more treacherous people around the LC;

The NW and the Free Folk see what expect them, if they don't unite behind Jon: the prospect of being flayed alive can be very helpful regarding that;

Or, with a bit of luck, the torture and murder of brothers of the NW and the direct menace to the NW, could make Roose act swiftly to neutralize Ramsay (sending him to Hornwood os forbiding him to leave the walls of Winterfell for the time being) to not give any more reason to the other northern lords to rebel against the Boltons, and no one would make a thing against the NW.

Of course, everything could turn horribly wrong, the NW (and a lot of Free Folk) being butchered by Ramsay and the Boltons, starting the cataclismic event of the fall of the Wall and the invasion of the Realm by hordes of flesh eating undead demons...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Adam Yozza said:

I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time what other option did he have? Jon could not meet the terms Ramsay offered. It was literally impossible. Fighting Ramsay is just about the only option he has at that point.

Of course he could meet those terms.  Better yet, if Jon was truly dedicated to protecting the realm and if he's responsible enough to put the needs of the many over the needs of Arya, he would surrender himself to Ramsay and admit that it was all his fault.  Remember, it was all Jon's fault to begin with for getting himself involved in Bolton affairs when he had no right to interfere with their activities in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

I’ve got a soft spot for the book version of Jon Snow.

Most members of the NW believe as they have believed for bunches of years that the wildlings or free folk are the enemy. They would be leery of the transactions LC Snow is undertaking.

Jon & the group of men who went ranging with Mormont understand the true threat. The wildlings/free folk understand the true threat.

There was a plot to rid the NW of Snow. The plot centers on Slynt and Thorne. I find it very difficult to believe Marsh is the brains behind the assassination attempt on LC Snow.

Technically speaking the moment Mance was revealed to LC Snow, Jon should have taken him into custody for being a deserter from the NW.

Except, that does not seem to be the way Martin wanted the story to go.

 

Jon, believes because of the wedding invitation that may have been forwarded by an unknown northman, that the girl on the horse in Mel’s vision is his sister, Arya.

This is before the pink/bastard letter. I think(?).

Like I said, LC Snow when discovering the Rattleshirt/Mance switcharoo should have taken Mance into custody. Complicated isn’t it, considering all the stuff that is transpiring.

LC Snow did not send Mance and his spearwives to WF. That can’t be used in arguments as to whether LC Snow is a traitor deserving of death. LC Snow sent Mance to intercept a girl near a lake. Mance for some odd reason ended up at WF.

This frekking mind fuck of a pink/bastard letter ends up at the Wall threatening the LC and the NW.

Where is Martin taking the story? What juicy bit of information is Martin going to reveal in his pending WoW book number six of ASOIAF? It took three books to discover who tried to kill Bran. I’m still not sure about who instigated Joffrey’s death.

Like the snowflake or not ---- LC Snow did not send Mance to WF. When the Mance/Rattleshirt reveal came about LC Snow should have taken Mance into custody. He didn’t. Hell, Jon even tried to convince Stannis of Mance’s importance.

Why did Martin do that?

Good Morning Clegane's Pup, Happy 4th of July if you're in the states.  :)

I don't have a soft spot for Jon.  I dislike him.  But I will be fair.

Jon sent the wildlings to get Arya from Ramsay.  He was not planning on taking Arya and then sending her back to Ramsay, was he?  Jon would be less wrong if he was planning to return Arya to Ramsay.  You know he was not.  He was planning to take Arya away.  Does it matter where they find Arya?  Not really.  Jon was willing to do anything to get his sister.  He knew perfectly well that Mance should be executed.  He knew perfectly well that sending anybody to take Arya from Ramsay is treason and he knew better than anybody that it's the equivalent of declaring war with House Bolton. 

Please consider this.  Jon had a chance to consider before saying the words and taking his vows.  He said his vows.  He took the oath.  He could have refused the position of LC.  He didn't.  Jon should respect the limitations and the boundaries of the organization that he joined.  If a rule needed to be changed, then change it first, amend it, and make it formal before you take any action that exceeds the limits of that rule.  In other words, change the rule and then act.  That's not Jon's way, unfortunately.  At least not when he's all emotional about his family.   I think he knew that what he was about to do would never pass.  He would have had a rebellion on his hands if he told the brothers he will let Mance walk and send him to steal his sister from her husband.  But he should have tried.  That is the proper way to do things.  Going off like a he did and hellbent on getting his sister was completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BalerionTheCat said:

I said it a lot of times. But my view is the vows concept is a slavery. One you put on yourself. Whether it is because you end up serving the wrong person. Or because it makes you do something you think is wrong. What did Jon was right. Nearly all along. But the vows were telling him otherwise. Therefore the vows are wrong. This is the stale concept of honor. Fucking stupidity. Think larger man! Where did it send Ned? You do what you believe is right. The gods, or a just Commander, will judge you for that. Take your responsibility!

That's it, in a nutshell. Take responsibility, make the hard choices you know are the right ones,   and don't just hide behind empty words. Needless to say, I agree wholeheartedly. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nevets said:

Actually, Jon recognizes that this is an issue.  That is why he segregates the women and sends them to Long Barrow, where they will be somewhat isolated from the rest of the watch.

As for his willingness to accept Wildlings to fight alongside his men, he is severely undermanned.  He needs recruits wherever he can get them.  

I am forced to admit, that from Marsh & Co.'s point of view, there are multiple legitimate problems with Jon.  He is too willing to allow a large influx of Wildlings into the North, without proper consideration of the trouble that is likely to cause.   His willngness to take the likes of the Weeper is a big problem.  He is (from what they know) openly supporting Stannis, which is likely to get them into trouble with the Crown, especially if Stannis is dead.  The fact that Mance is really alive is a definite problem.  And now he is going to war against the son of the Warden of the North.  

I agree that all the things you mention here are indeed highly problematic. Not to everyone, obviously. But Jon is making many decisions that can and will and are viewed by many not only as treasonous and/or oathbreaking, but also problematic in the sense of opening the door to a lot of things going wrong and chaos ensuing. For instance, having thousands of wildlings to try and keep in check. That sort of thing. And while I acknowledge and even agree - to a point; I agree more w/ the fact that all these issues are unacceptable to many and can totally see where they're coming from - I still think that Jon made the right decisions, every last one of them. Mance is too valuable and resourceful; executing him is a waste of resources when resources are incredibly low. Thousands of wildlings need lots of food, clothing etc. And Jon knows all this! He takes a loan to see the NW through the Winter - hopefully, if winter doesn't last a decade. He worries b/c he hasn't got a clue how he's going to pay back the loan... but it was the right decision. Without more people to man the NW castles and the Wall, they're all dead and for all he knows the whole world with them, so worry about paying the loan later. He knows he has to take The Weeper in, if he were to turn up at the gate, that is. But I'll bet anything that if them Weeper ever turns up wanting to come south of the Wall, Jon will keep tabs on him and take appropriate action if need be. 

And going to war with Ramsay Bolton is, imo, the most problematic of his decisions. But to me, when he gave that speech in the Shieldhall and announced what he was going to do... it was beautiful, it was a total fist-pumping moment for me... especially after reading the PL and thinking about his family and home, and choosing love.

“It was signed,
Ramsay Bolton,
Trueborn Lord of Winterfell.
“Snow?” said Tormund Giantsbane. “You look like your father’s bloody head just rolled out o’ that paper.”                                                                                                                [snip]                                                                                                                                                  “I won’t say you’re wrong. What do you mean to do, crow?”
Jon flexed the fingers of his sword hand. The Night’s Watch takes no part. He closed his fist and opened it again. What you propose is nothing less than treason. He thought of Robb, with snowflakes melting in his hair. Kill the boy and let the man be born. He thought of Bran, clambering up a tower wall, agile as a monkey. Of Rickon’s breathless laughter. Of Sansa, brushing out Lady’s coat and singing to herself. You know nothing, Jon Snow. He thought of Arya, her hair as tangled as a bird’s nest. I made him a warm cloak from the skins of the six whores who came with him to Winterfell … I want my bride back … I want my bride back … I want my bride back …
“I think we had best change the plan,” Jon Snow said.”

Ramsay has to be taken out, the sooner the better. I don't care if it's oathbreaking, treason, a sin, frowned upon, whatever. It's absolutely all those things, and it's also the right thing

5 hours ago, Nevets said:

While I happen to agree with most of what Jon has done, even I have to admit some of it is problematic.  While I don't support Bowen Marsh and his conspirators, I can certainly understand where he is coming from.  Unfortunately, this attack will likely make the "realms of men" less safe, because Jon is practically the only person in a leadership position who is taking the threat of the Others seriously and is in a position to do something about it.  His absence will likely inhibit this.

It will be very interesting to see how it will all play out. I agree that Jon's absence will potentially weaken the Wall b/c the WW threat would not be taken seriously by Marsh & co. But I find it extremely hard to believe that Jon will out of commission for too long and that Marsh & co will be in command very long, if at all. I think Marsh's days are numbered. In fact, I think he may have hours, not days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

How can you possibly know that? That's right, you can't. 

 

The same thing applies to your entire argument. 

 

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

CB is totally vulnerable to an attack from the south. You know that, right? And you should also know that before the wildlings came through, the crows at CB numbered less than 400. So yeah, Ramsay could very well put them all to the sword and be done with it, 

Have I ever denied that? 

 

11 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

And if you mean "he wouldn't do that, because that wouldn't be proper and well received",

No if he did then he would get executed by his father.

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Don't need any other justification for Jon to break his oath other than he broke an oath for the greater good.

But what is the greater good? Is gathering men to fight in a war that isn't a war against the others for the greater good? What Jon was proposing was letting  men which are in short supply pretty much everywhere off to fight in a war in the middle of winter to slaughter more able-bodied men that could fight against the others. How is that in the "greater good"?  

You can be fine with Jon breaking his oath but don't go hating on Bowen for betraying the Lord Commander. 

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

You're welcome. 

I wasn't talking to you. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 300 H&H Magnum said:

Of course he could meet those terms.  Better yet, if Jon was truly dedicated to protecting the realm and if he's responsible enough to put the needs of the many over the needs of Arya, he would surrender himself to Ramsay and admit that it was all his fault.  Remember, it was all Jon's fault to begin with for getting himself involved in Bolton affairs when he had no right to interfere with their activities in the first place.

No he couldn't. Ramsay demands that Jon turn over Mel, Shireen and Selyse (doable, though morally it would be despicable to do so knowing what fate awaits them) and also Theon and Jeyne. It's that last part that makes Ramsay's terms impossible because Jon doesn't have Jeyne and Theon.

And yes it was Jon's fault, though he was not wrong to do so. Do you think Ramsay is that reasonable though? He would kill Jon, then probably storm the NW just to be sure they're not hiding FArya and his Reek or even just for fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 300 H&H Magnum said:

Good Morning Clegane's Pup, Happy 4th of July if you're in the states.  :)

I don't have a soft spot for Jon.  I dislike him.  But I will be fair.

Jon sent the wildlings to get Arya from Ramsay.  He was not planning on taking Arya and then sending her back to Ramsay, was he?  Jon would be less wrong if he was planning to return Arya to Ramsay.  You know he was not.  He was planning to take Arya away.  Does it matter where they find Arya?  Not really.  Jon was willing to do anything to get his sister.  He knew perfectly well that Mance should be executed.  He knew perfectly well that sending anybody to take Arya from Ramsay is treason and he knew better than anybody that it's the equivalent of declaring war with House Bolton. 

Please consider this.  Jon had a chance to consider before saying the words and taking his vows.  He said his vows.  He took the oath.  He could have refused the position of LC.  He didn't.  Jon should respect the limitations and the boundaries of the organization that he joined.  If a rule needed to be changed, then change it first, amend it, and make it formal before you take any action that exceeds the limits of that rule.  In other words, change the rule and then act.  That's not Jon's way, unfortunately.  At least not when he's all emotional about his family.   I think he knew that what he was about to do would never pass.  He would have had a rebellion on his hands if he told the brothers he will let Mance walk and send him to steal his sister from her husband.  But he should have tried.  That is the proper way to do things.  Going off like a he did and hellbent on getting his sister was completely wrong.

Jon didn't send the wildlings to Winterfell. Mel send them to Long Lake to intercept Arya there and while Jon knew about it and even approved it to a certain extent, going to Winterfell is solely on Mance. And I think it does matter where they find Arya. Looking at the chronology, I don't think Ramsay's wedding had taken place by the time Alys Karstark arrived at the Wall, but I'm not sure; I'll have to find my copy of Dance to check that. If I'm right though, then Jon intercepting Arya at Long Lake isn't kidnapping/abduction of a Lord's wife, it's helping an unmarried girl escape from a betrothal she wants no part of.

As to the bolded, are you an idiot? Sending a girl back to the man that it going to physically and sexually abuse her is the right thing to do? In what world is that the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rickon Stark The Aulë said:

 

17 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

And if you mean "he wouldn't do that, because that wouldn't be proper and well received",

No if he did then he would get executed by his father.

So, Roose, who ostensibly let the murder of his son and heir Domeric slide, would get his smallclothes twisted in a bunch over a murder of crows (pun intended)? That he could not forgive? What, does he care more about the Night's Watch than about House Bolton?

Don't make stuff up, especially stuff going directly against what's spelled out in the books. You might think it helps your case, but the truth is, it does the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

So, Roose, who ostensibly let the murder of his son and heir Domeric slide,

Domeric died due to a sudden sickness, there was no evidence that Ramsay killed other then that right before Domeric got sick he visited Ramsay. Had he executed Ramsay then and there he would have been called a kinslayer which is a crime that is up there with breaking guest right. 

 

18 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

What, does he care more about the Night's Watch than about House Bolton?

The only real region where the Nights watch is respected is... THE NORTH. The Nights Watch basically survives off of the Northern Lords, we are talking about a 8,000 year old organization that has shown it's usefulness again and again by fending off thousands of Free-Folk time and time again. You seriously think that the North doesn't appreciate that? You think the Umbers and the Mountains Clans would be all fine and dandy with Roose Bolton destroying the only thing separating the North from the Hordes of Free Folk? HELL NO 

 

Every Northern house would rise in rebellion if Roose allowed Ramsay to destroy the Nights Watch the Northmen would have rallied together easily, hanging every bolton and Frey in sight. Roose's hold on the North is extremely thin, in order to calm down his vassals he would have to execute his bastard son. 

Any man of the Night’s Watch is welcome here at Winterfell for as long as he wishes to stay.

- Robb Stark to Yoren and his Sworn Brothers

 

You think this a throwaway line? The Nights Watch has always been a respected and sacred organization in the North. 

According to the world of Ice and Fire:

"Only the fact that the Northmen themselves greatly honor the watch has kept it functioning, and a great part of the food that keeps the black brothers of Castle Black, The Shadow Tower, and Eastwatch-by-the-sea from starving comes not from the Gift but from the yearly gifts these Northern lords deliver to the Wall in token of their support" 

What you are suggesting directly goes against how the Northmen and how the law works. Stop trying to pretend that Jon wasn't breaking his oaths. He was. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Rickon Stark The Aulë said:

Domeric died due to a sudden sickness, there was no evidence that Ramsay killed other then that right before Domeric got sick he visited Ramsay.

Everybody thinks it was Ramsay. Roose thinks it was Ramsay.

Quote

Had he executed Ramsay then and there he would have been called a kinslayer which is a crime that is up there with breaking guest right. 

If he kills Ramsay ever, in any circumstances, he will be called a kinslayer. No matter, murder, execution, fair fight, field of battle, self-defense, accident. Robb Stark chopped Rickard Karstark's head off for murder, and Lord Rickard still was asshole enough to throw the k-word. Maekar Targaryen was called kinslayer. So was Bloodraven.

Quote

The only real region where the Nights watch is respected is... THE NORTH. The Nights Watch basically survives off of the Northern Lords, we are talking about a 8,000 year old organization that has shown it's usefulness again and again by fending off thousands of Free-Folk time and time again. You seriously think that the North doesn't appreciate that?

We're not talking the North, we're talking, specifically, Ramsay Bolton. And the Pink Letter doesn't exactly reek of that alleged respect to the Night's Watch.

You might have missed it, it seems that you did, but Ramsay Bolton is not Ned Stark. I'll go even further: Ramsay Bolton is quite different from Ned Stark. Do not quote Ned Stark as proof how Ramsay Bolton would act.

 

Quote

You think the Umbers and the Mountains Clans would be all fine and dandy with Roose Bolton destroying the only thing separating the North from the Hordes of Free Folk? HELL NO 

The vision of the whole North uniting "easily" is, again, against what's written in the books, considering there are observable obstacles even for uniting Karstark with Karstark and Umber with Umber. That's for the uniting. As for the motivation, the hypothetical common uniting cause, recently people in the North spend much more time discussing - agreeing on, really - what a rabid dog Ramsay Snow is, than how swell and honorable the Night Watch is.

(By the way, your argument: Ramsay wouldn't dare to attack the Night's Watch, cuts both ways. Because if what you say is true (we know it's not, but let's assume it for the sake of this paragraph), then Jon Snow didn't put the Watch in any danger. Because Ramsay Bolton wouldn't ever harm the Watch).

OK, I'm done here, have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Everybody thinks it was Ramsay.

Your proof of this is...

 

1 minute ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

If he kills Ramsay ever, in any circumstances, he will be called a kinslayer. No matter, murder, execution, fair fight, field of battle, self-defense, accident.

Did I ever say otherwise? 

 

2 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

We're not talking the North, we're talking, specifically, Ramsay Bolton. And the Pink Letter doesn't exactly reek of that alleged respect to the Night's Watch.

You might have missed it, it seems that you did, but Ramsay Bolton is not Ned Stark. I'll go even further: Ramsay Bolton is quite different from Ned Stark. Do not quote Ned Stark as proof how Ramsay Bolton would act.

We are talking about the North whether you like it or not. You want to shove Ramsay into some white box where there is no one other than Jon which is completely untrue. If Ramsay decimated the entire Nights Watch then the ENTIRE NORTH would demand his head. 

 

4 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

The vision of the whole North uniting "easily" is, again, against what's written in the books, considering there are observable obstacles even for uniting Karstark with Karstark and Umber with Umber, that's for the uniting. As for the motivation, recently people in the North spend much more time discussing - agreeing on, really - what a rabid dog Ramsay Snow is, than how swell and honorable the Night Watch is.

(By the way, your argument: Ramsay wouldn't dare to attack the Night's Watch, cuts both ways. Because if what you say is true (we know it's not, but let's assume it for the sake of this paragraph), then Jon Snow didn't put the Watch in any danger. Because Ramsay Bolton wouldn't ever harm the Watch).

 

Uniting Karstark with Karstark?  Umber with Umber? Umm what? It is pretty obvious there isn't a rift within the Umbers or Karstarks when it comes to the Free-folk. Hell Mor "Crowfood" Umber's Daughter was stolen by some of the free-folk. There is no argument in the North on whether the Nights Watch is Necessary because it absolutely is. This isn't supporting Stannis, this is avenging the Nights Watch, there is no argument it is easiest thing that could unite the North against the Boltons which is exactly why Ramsay wouldn't do it. Ramsay is a lot of things but a idiot? I doubt it. 

 

I have already addressed that the Lord Commander is a completely different entity than the Nights Watch. Ramsay can kill Jon and still not decimate the Nights watch. Maybe if you bothered to read my comments instead of just skimming through them then maybe you could understand. Instead you are up in arms over me acknowledging that Jon broke his vows and that Bowen wasn't in the wrong. 

 

11 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

OK, I'm done here, have a nice day.

It seems I have won this argument... wow XD so this is what its like when you win arguments in this fandom. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rickon Stark The Aulë said:

Your proof of this is...

 

Did I ever say otherwise? 

 

We are talking about the North whether you like it or not. You want to shove Ramsay into some white box where there is no one other than Jon which is completely untrue. If Ramsay decimated the entire Nights Watch then the ENTIRE NORTH would demand his head. 

 

Uniting Karstark with Karstark?  Umber with Umber? Umm what? It is pretty obvious there isn't a rift within the Umbers or Karstarks when it comes to the Free-folk. Hell Mor "Crowfood" Umber's Daughter was stolen by some of the free-folk. There is no argument in the North on whether the Nights Watch is Necessary because it absolutely is. This isn't supporting Stannis, this is avenging the Nights Watch, there is no argument it is easiest thing that could unite the North against the Boltons which is exactly why Ramsay wouldn't do it. Ramsay is a lot of things but a idiot? I doubt it. 

 

I have already addressed that the Lord Commander is a completely different entity than the Nights Watch. Ramsay can kill Jon and still not decimate the Nights watch. Maybe if you bothered to read my comments instead of just skimming through them then maybe you could understand. Instead you are up in arms over me acknowledging that Jon broke his vows and that Bowen wasn't in the wrong. 

 

It seems I have won this argument... wow XD so this is what its like when you win arguments in this fandom. 

 

 

Proof- Barbrey Dustin also 'knows' that Ramsay killed Domeric and wants him dead for it.

No, you never did say otherwise but I think the point he's making is that eventually, Roose will have to kill Ramsay so why would he do it over the NW and not Domeric. Personally don't agree with that sentiment but that's what I think he meant.

And yeah we're talking about the whole of the North. Roose wouldn't dare take action against the NW nor allow Ramsay to because of precisely the reasons you gave. It would just give the North another reason to revolt. Ramsay, though; what part of the text gives the indication that Ramsay cares about what the people think of him or that he considers long term consequences? Ramsay, with or without Roose's approval, would absolutely be willing to destroy the NW. Especially if he decides to off his father first.

It's possible to kill the LC without destroying the watch, yes. Nonetheless, attacking Castle Black to kill the LC is still an attack on the watch whether you destroy the whole organization or not. Would Ramsay do that though? No, he would kill everyone in CB and burn it to the ground. He might leave Shadow Tower and Eastwatch alone but that probably depends on his mood at the time. You can argue all you want but Ramsay's got a record for doing shit like this.

Yes Jon broke some of his vows. He didn't kill Mance when he discovered he was alive; that's breaking his oath, though with Mance's skills and abilities it would be a waste to do so. Giving Stannis advice to take down the Bolton's is also a violation, and so is preparing to march south to fight Ramsay though in the case of the latter it was absolutely justified. Letting the wildlings through the wall, though, is not breaking his vows. Nor is allowing Stannis to reside there for a period of time. If 'Arya' (Jeyne) had been the girl on the dying horse then allowing her to shelter at CB is also perfectly fine.

And in the cases were Jon did break part of his oath, his actions were still right on a moral level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rickon Stark The Aulë said:

It seems I have won this argument... wow XD so this is what its like when you win arguments in this fandom. 

This is what it is like when trolls claim victory in arguments. Winning actually means contributing something that makes others respect you for your knowledge and insight. One doesn't win friends or respect by disgusting people with your crowing behavior towards others. You are new here. So far, color me unimpressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...