King in the North or Warden of the North?

[Third World King]

The rightful king.

and which king does the Watch recognize? Does it not recognize all kings of the realms?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

If a person states their intention of killing the lord commander, will nothing will be done until the lord commander is killed? So, the Watch will only act after a crime is committed?

I think that executing a person before they've actually done anything wrong is a slippery slope, yes. I also question under what authority Bowen Marsh presumes to execute anyone. I get the impression that such meting of justice is reserved for lords and/or other "officers." Case in point: Gared wasn't executed on sight; he was held until Ned himself could carry out the sentence.

This is all probably pointless because Jon isn't going to stay dead (if he dies at all), and your boy Marsh is going to shuffle loose the mortal coil very soon, probably messily. But you know, whatever. Rah rah Jon's a deserter rah rah execution rah. Enjoy it while it lasts; I hope it brings you satisfaction, however temporary.

[Prince of the Green]

If a person states their intention of killing the lord commander, will nothing will be done until the lord commander is killed? So, the Watch will only act after a crime is committed?

I would think that the Watch would take the steps necessary to prevent that scenario, start an investigation, imprison the person(s) stating such things, etc.

And, anyway, Bowen Marsh apparently had enough lackeys to conspire to murder the Lord Commander. What's to stop the Lord Steward from stopping him, imprisoning him, instead?

[Third World King]

Too true. It's a shame we didn't get to see a host of Wildlings and friends to Lord Commander Snow destroy Marsh and all of his cronies after the act. If I recall correctly, attempted murder on the Lord Commander is still considered more criminal than inciting a little battle furor.

If the wildlings shed any NW blood, they will die. Half of the Watch may love Jon but all of the Watch hates wildlings.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

If the wildling shed any NW blood, they will die. Half of the Watch may love Jon but all of the Watch hates wildlings.

You do know that the wildlings outnumber the Watch men substantially, right? And yeah sure there are hostages, but ... things happen. In any case, the wildlings don't have to hurt many Night's Watch men, just the four (apparently) treacherous bastards who attacked Jon. And they might have help doing it. :)

[Prince of the Green]

No. Jon would have no right, just Aemon had no right to avenge the death of his kin who where brutally slaughtered by the Lannisters.

Aemon Targaryen was a Targaryen, of Valyrian descent, without the blood of the First Men. Jon doesn't have that problem.

and which king does the Watch recognize? Is it not the one in King's landing?

The King in King's Landing was born of incest, between Cersei Lannister and Jaime Lannister. His right to rule was stripped the moment of conception. You may say, 'Well, what about the Targaryen Dynasty?! Those kings were born mostly out of incest!' Those kings had the blood of the king himself (unless the rumors of Aemon the Dragonknight being the father of Daeron II were true).

[Prince of the Green]

If the wildlings shed any NW blood, they will die. Half of the Watch may love Jon but all of the Watch hates wildlings.

You forget that some of the men of the Night's Watch are also of the Free Folk, inspired by Jon Snow to turn their cloaks completely. And I never thought that Bowen Marsh commanded fear, loyalty, respect, or love from the Night's Watch proper.

[Third World King]

I think that executing a person before they've actually done anything wrong is a slippery slope, yes. I also question under what authority Bowen Marsh presumes to execute anyone. I get the impression that such meting of justice is reserved for lords and/or other "officers." Case in point: Gared wasn't executed on sight; he was held until Ned himself could carry out the sentence.

Jon stated his desire to lead a host to attack Bolton. That's enough reason for desertion to me.

Did Slynt have a trial before he was executed?

This is all probably pointless because Jon isn't going to stay dead (if he dies at all), and your boy Marsh is going to shuffle loose the mortal coil very soon, probably messily. But you know, whatever. Rah rah Jon's a deserter rah rah execution rah. Enjoy it while it lasts; I hope it brings you satisfaction, however temporary.

Are you the writer? How do you know these things?

[Third World King]

You forget that some of the men of the Night's Watch are also of the Free Folk, inspired by Jon Snow to turn their cloaks completely. And I never thought that Bowen Marsh commanded fear, loyalty, respect, or love from the Night's Watch proper.

Marsh knows he has the backing of at least half of the Night Watch. The Watch hates wildlings, especially after what the Weeping man did to Garth and the other rangers. Blood will be spilled and most of it will be wildling.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Jon stated his desire to lead a host to attack Bolton. That's enough reason for desertion to me.

And it's your decision, right?

Did Slynt have a trial before he was executed?

Slynt disobeyed a direct order multiple times. Jon, as the Lord Commander, was invested with the authority to pass judgment. Bowen Marsh isn't in charge of squat and only has authority over his stewards, who are, let's face it, not exactly the best material on the Wall — and even they're still ultimately under Jon's authority.

If the Watch had wanted Bowen to lead them and make decisions on their behalf, they would have freaking elected him Lord Commander.

Are you the writer? How do you know these things?

I don't know for sure that Bowen is going to get curb-stomped, no — that's just a fond wish. Jon ending up alive or resurrected, though, is something that I think most reasonable people can see coming, yes.

Marsh knows he has the backing of at least half of the Night Watch. The Watch hates wildlings, especially after what the Weeping man did to Garth and the other rangers. Blood will be spilled and most of it will be wildling.

And yet I only counted four. As for this wildling blood that you keep insisting will be spilled, again, you do know that the wildlings outnumber the Watch brothers, right? By quite a bit.

[Hear Us Roar]

To be honest for they everyday Northerner it does not make a spit of difference.

[Third World King]

Aemon Targaryen was a Targaryen, of Valyrian descent, without the blood of the First Men. Jon doesn't have that problem.

uhmm, Jon swore an oath. Whatever blood Jon got in his veins matters not.

The King in King's Landing was born of incest, between Cersei Lannister and Jaime Lannister. His right to rule was stripped the moment of conception. You may say, 'Well, what about the Targaryen Dynasty?! Those kings were born mostly out of incest!' Those kings had the blood of the king himself (unless the rumors of Aemon the Dragonknight being the father of Daeron II were true).

So, the Watch does not recognize the King in King's landing then?

[Batman]

I aggree, though I do think they would like stannis to be their king. If not him, then independence. Being under the iron throne does nothing for them except take away money.

There are certain aspects of Stannis that Ned Stark shared. Stannis' sense of justice and honour is quite Northern and what he did for the Glovers proves it. Beside Jon, he would be next in preference.

[Prince of the Green]

Marsh knows he has the backing of at least half of the Night Watch. The Watch hates wildlings, especially after what the Weeping man did to Garth and the other rangers. Blood will be spilled and most of it will be wildling.

You did read Apple Martini's post about the numbers comparison between the Night's Watch and the Wildlings, didn't you? The Free Folk have more men than does the Night's Watch, not only at Castle Black, but at the other more recent installations of castles along the Wall.

The Night's Watch hates Wildlings because they can't understand them. That lack of understanding leads to fear, resentment, hate, etc. I think the wildlings are going to remember who saved them, and who harmed their savior.

[Batman]

I don't think they'll bend their knees for an oathbreaker who let the Wildlings march straight through the Wall. But time will tell if he will take up Winterfell after having already rejected it once.

Well Robb has already named Jon his heir for the lords of the North to see, sadly most are missing. There are ways around the oath as Robb said. As to the wildlings, the North may be more conflicted if an army of them marched to Winterfell and hung Ramsay Snow with Ned Starks son at their head. Only time will tell.

[Third World King]

And it's your decision, right?

I'm the reader. I get to decide whether Jon deserved to be stabbed or not.

Slynt disobeyed a direct order multiple times. Jon, as the Lord Commander, was invested with the authority to pass judgment. Bowen Marsh isn't in charge of squat and only has authority over his stewards, who are, let's face it, not exactly the best material on the Wall — and even they're still ultimately under Jon's authority.

If the Watch had wanted Bowen to lead them and make decisions on their behalf, they would have freaking elected him Lord Commander.

Some would say Jon disregarded direct commands multiple times by allowing Mance to live, by aiding Stannis etc. It was only a matter of time before Jon was deposed and I am glad it happened sooner rather than later. Jon's rule may be one of the shortest in the history of the Watch.

I don't know for sure that Bowen is going to get curb-stomped, no — that's just a fond wish. Jon ending up alive or resurrected, though, is something that I think most reasonable people can see coming, yes.

I wish he would be resurrected just so he could be a Melisandre creature.

And yet I only counted four. As for this wildling blood that you keep insisting will be spilled, again, you do know that the wildlings outnumber the Watch brothers, right? By quite a bit.

The wildling may outnumber the Watch, but they will always be outgunned and outmatched. The wildling still use spear points made out of bone lol.

[Prince of the Green]

There are certain aspects of Stannis that Ned Stark shared. Stannis' sense of justice and honour is quite Northern and what he did for the Glovers proves it. Beside Jon, he would be next in preference.

I am going to have to apologize to the other folks reading this thread. It turned into a bit of a Jon Snow argument, but, frankly, the topic needs to shift back into its original form.

Stannis, as King, wouldn't dare allow the North to retain their kingship, but I have my doubts that he would look upon any other lord of the North not named Stark as Warden of the North.

As far as the Kingship in the North, I'd say it's Rickon's if he can be returned safely to Wyman Manderly. Jon, if/when he should recover from his wounds, will have both eyes firmly set on the Wall and North of it. If he were given the position, I believe he'd do well, but his leadership is vital on the Wall, now more than ever. Rickon will be able to depend on one brother who should inhibit, or at the very least, warn of, any southerly progression of wights or Others, and another brother who is able to see through the eyes of trees. His counselors will be all he could hope for.

GRRM made mention of Jon being so similar often. Perhaps his mannerisms and personality in that likened sense will lead to his mentoring his little brother.

[Tagganaro]

If it's seen as honorable, how come the Wall is filled with murderers, thieves and scum from the deepest dungeons in the seven kingdoms? How come no one is rushing to go join besides those who have no other choice but death or imprisonment?

You're the one who seem to be mistaken, the Watch is just a bunch of thieves who will not hesitate to take your life given the opportunity.

I was talking about perception of the NW. I made it clear that this was not the reality. Regardless, it still does not explain why highborn children would go there such as Waymar Royce + Jon, who obviously has a high opinion of the NW whether he is mistaken or not in that opinion.

It was impossible? How has the Night Watch managed to stay neutral in all the wars of the realm?

What is the rule of the night watch? The Night Watch does not take sides in the wars of the realm. It's simple.

What did Jon do? Take Stannis side, thereby putting the Watch in jeopardy. Would Mormont have done the same? No, Mormont would kindly thank Stannis for his all help but tell Stannis to kick rocks, after he demands lands given to the Watch. He would have told him in no uncertain terms, that the watch does not participate in the wars of the realm.

And what would Stannis do then? As I pointed out, the NW had no power to deny Stannis. He wanted to do it legitimately, Jon agreed with his idea, so it happened. If Jon disagreed, who knows what happens? NW does not have the manpower to deny Stannis if he really wants this.

What does Mormont have to do with anything? We have no idea what he would have done, as he has never faced a situation where a King showed up at the Wall in the middle of a war and demanded concessions that the NW could not safely deny.

Well, if Stannis did that, no Northern man would have joined under his banner. Stannis is a beggar, he would never take anything by force, because he knows that would be the end of him.

When and how did Benjen Stark agree to any of Stannis terms?

This is all largely irrelevant anyway because Jon agreed with Stannis's policy. It's not like Stannis was even twisting his arm or anything, Jon thought it was the right idea.

Do you have any idea who exactly is the Weeping man? He is a cold blooded killer, he does not kill because he has to, he kills because he loves to kill just as Rorge, Biter, Ramsay. Men like these can never be taken in, they will kill you at the earliest opportunity. Those men that murdered Mormont are nothing compared to men like these...

Wow, you seem to know the Weeper pretty well based on what? Either way, again this is just a diversion and irrelevant to the argument that I made. So, what is Jon's decision here? Leave the Weeper alone so he can try and raid the unguarded and undermanned Wall in weak spots, leave him alone so he can get killed by the Others and raised as a wight to again attack the Watch, or he can try and turn him into an ally under threat of good behavior and gain much needed manpower. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here, based on Jon's available options it seems pretty obvious what the correct choice is.

How will the Northmen feel about being ruled by a wildling? Have you even asked yourself that question?

How would the North feel about being under the command of a wildling? Alys and her husband will be deposed before winter if done...

Again, this is another diversion. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue about- Jon took 2 enemies in the Arnolf Karsarks and the Thenns and turned both into allies. Who is to say what happens with Alys and Sigorn? And who exactly is Sigorn of Thenn "commanding"? And who is "deposing" Alys Karstark, by all accounts the rightful heir to Karhold (after her brother who is captive), while Arnolf Karstark is stuck with Stannis who is about to be warned of his impending betrayal? Arnolf is probably about to be short a head, while Cregan is not gonna have any men to help him out.

How will Jon make the repayments to the Iron Bank? Remember, the people pay the Watch in kind only.

Do you have any idea what the Iron Bank will do should Jon fail to make the repayments? The iron Bank will have its due...

Again, you're not answering the point I made and using diversionary arguments. What happens in the future is not relevant should the NW cease to exist because it doesn't have the manpower to fight the Others. I really don't understand what kind of argument you are making-

Is it that it was a mistake to allow the wildlings through in the first place? I can't imagine any impartial reader of the books would try to make that argument. The NW is entirely undermanned and incapable of fighting off an invasion of both wildlings and extra wights created by not allowing those wildlings through. So assuming you don't agree with Bowen Marsh's entirely illogical, idiotic, and flat-out cowardly plan of sticking his head in the Snow, hiding behind the Wall, and hoping for the best, what entirely are you trying to argue?

Likewise, I don't understand how you can say that Stannis is the "losing horse" when it seems as if the Boltons are about to get massacred by their own men and the Lannisters are slowly whittling down to nothing. Either way, how is Jon supposed to not get involved in the affairs of the realm when the affairs of the realm are involving him? Why should Jon stay neutral when the Bolton's and Lannisters aren't? Why shouldn't Jon try and support the candidate who cares about the Watch and who will support them with the necessary reinforcements and manpower?

He keeps saying that, but yet, it seems to me that the red witch is slowly consolidating her power on the wall. Who sent Mance to Winterfell? Was it Jon or the red witch? Who is in charge really? Melisandre does what she wants..

Where is there evidence of Mel "consolidating power" on the Wall? Her POV seems to indicate her feeling entirely isolated and frustrated over her inability to gain Jon's trust and attention, so she resorts to increasingly desperate and tacky gestures of "magic tricks" to try and show him her power.

Jon pretty much gave Mel and Mance one chance to prove themselves. She failed when she was wrong about Alys- Does the final exchange between them mean nothing, when Jon calls putting hope in her a "fools hope" and dismisses her right away?

Is Jon not going against everything the Watch believes in? The Watch does not take sides, yet Jon actively helps Stannis? What will Maester Aemon feel after writing that letter to Cersei about how the NW does not take sides bla bla bla? Was that all a lie?

Cersei didn't seem to mind taking sides when she planned on sending men to assassinate Jon Snow. And why is everything the Watch believes in suddenly wrong to go against, when you yourself have dismissed it as an institution full of murderers and rapists that no one has any respect for? Well, maybe that's the problem with the Watch's current operating principles. They are unworkable and obsolete in modern-day Westeros.

[Third World King]

You did read Apple Martini's post about the numbers comparison between the Night's Watch and the Wildlings, didn't you? The Free Folk have more men than does the Night's Watch, not only at Castle Black, but at the other more recent installations of castles along the Wall.

Having numbers means nothing to be honest. The wildlings are untrained, indisciplined, under armed to pose any serious threat to the Watch.

The Night's Watch hates Wildlings because they can't understand them. That lack of understanding leads to fear, resentment, hate, etc. I think the wildlings are going to remember who saved them, and who harmed their savior.

They hate wildlings because wildling kill crows.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I'm the reader. I get to decide whether Jon deserved to be stabbed or not.

I'm also a reader and I think Jon didn't deserve to get stabbed. See how that works?

Some would say Jon disregarded direct commands multiple times by allowing Mance to live, by aiding Stannis etc. It was only a matter of time before Jon was deposed and I am glad it happened sooner rather than later. Jon's rule may be one of the shortest in the history of the Watch.

Whose commands? Who gives Jon commands? The Lord Commander doesn't take commands, her gives them. It's part of that whole "commander" thing being in the title, you see.

I wish he would be resurrected just so he could be a Melisandre creature.

OK.

The wildling may outnumber the Watch, but they will always be outgunned and outmatched. The wildling still use spear points made out of bone lol.

The fact that you support the Old Pomegranate while gleefully anticipating the mass slaughter of people under the Watch's protection makes me very sad.

Anyway. As hilarious — and, sorry, utterly, 100% futile — as your irrational hatred for Jon is, I'm going to have to leave you to it. Have a good night.