Bowen Snowslayer redemption arc

[Lord Varys]

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Interesting view.

It seems to me Martin's message is that mindless adherence to vows and honor is one of the big evils in his world.

I don't think that's the message in relation to the vows of the Night's Watch - whose purpose and meaning are laid down to us by Maester Aemon in AGoT. A purpose and meaning that is conveyed in such a striking and convincing manner that I see no reason to doubt that George himself thinks the NW has set up itself rather masterfully.

When you take the black you leave your family and friends behind. That's part of the deal. And you know that. It is not that you continue to live in the real world - like a KG - being torn between various vows and responsibilities, possibly even having loved one you should not fuck right under your nose.

And it is also very obvious that people caring more about their own family than the survival of mankind would actually ruin the Watch and their purpose when the Others actually attacked.

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As demonstrated by Jaime Lannister being reviled for his finest moment (killing Aerys and saving 500,000 lives), just because he broke his vow.

Killing Aerys saved no one. Killing Rossart did. Jaime could have saved KL also by arresting, injuring, knocking out, or distracting the king. This was not a moral dilemma. The man had other options than just 'doing nothing and allow KL to burn' and 'killing Aerys to prevent it'.

He killed the man because he wanted to, and thus he pissed on the vows he swore. This was not a deed done out of idealism.

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As demonstrated by Barristan having to sit by and watch when Aerys committed his atrocities, because "he had sworn a vow".

The idea that blind obedience isn't an integral part of this world and something that's inherently criticized by the author on a large scale makes little sense. Hundreds and thousands of humble people follow their lords into pointless battle to slake their desire for vengeance and retribution when they themselves couldn't care less who was the rightful king or whose father had to be avenged for this or that reason.

The author rarely addresses that, and gives no intention that he cares about overcoming that inherent in justice of the entire framework of a society. And within the noble sphere vows are an integral part of society. If you can trust a man's word you can trust nothing.

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As demonstrated by Jon, who, like me, and like any other sane person, chose to save his sister from a vicious rapist rather than selfishly protect his own honor.

I trust it you are also part of a military order then? You live in a society where the breaking of promises and vows can result in you losing your head? If you don't, then you project your own values onto a world where they are, quite frankly, not followed.

The people in Westeros don't expect you to save your sister from a rapist if said rapist happens to be her legal husband. Because there is no such crime as marital rape in Westeros. Even if Jon had not taken the black, he would still have no right to come between a husband and his wife. But as a black brother he most definitely doesn't have that right.

And thus it is actually wrong what Jon did there.

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Martin himself was pretty clear that Jon had very good reasons for his actions. Never clear cut, easy choices. But justifiable choices nevertheless.

Go on then, given me GRRM's justification for Jon's actions. Why did he what he did, and why is this commendable in a moral sense within the moral framework of that story? Why is it that Arya's life is more important than a united front against the Others?

45 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I personally expect a twist from George, where Jon does not exact vengeance on Bowen Marsh but instead forgives him and he becomes Reborn Jon's loyal follower. Almost a Saul becoming Paul situation, with "For the Watch" being his Damascus moment.

Could very well be, actually. I'd not be surprised if he got that offer. Might even be that he chooses the block instead, just as Larys Strong and the Belgrave fellow did.

21 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

A handful of black brothers have no right to be judge, jury, and executioner of their Lord Commander, who was chosen by their Sworn Brothers of the Night's Watch. They murdered their Lord Commander, just like the group of mutineers murdered Lord Commander Jeor Mormont at Craster's Keep. That they made the choice to murder Jon on their own, rather than arrest and imprison him to await the judgement of their black brothers, indicates they didn't believe their brothers would agree with their judgement and sentence.

Motives do matter. If Jeor Mormont had decided to abandon the Wall and join his wastrel son in Meereen his fellow brothers would also have had the right to put him down less his actions bring shame upon the entire Watch.

And we actually don't know how much support Marsh has. Considering the man is clearly no hero nor the bravest of man I actually doubt he would act if he didn't have the support of most of the men at the Watch. Unlike Jon Snow, he actually does know most of the men in the Watch, having served there for many years.

An attempt to imprison Jon can be seen as impossible at this point, considering that he set himself as a war lord with his own wildling army.

There is a reason why the Caltrops conspired to murder the Two Betrayers, too, instead of simply arresting them - they had to much of following so that this course would have been too risky. An arrested Jon would have been free in moments.

21 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Ramsay demanded that Jon send him Arya Stark, the last known surviving heir of Winterfell, Selyse Baratheon, the wife and queen of Stannis Baratheon, Shireen Baratheon, the only child and heir of Stannis Baratheon, in return for not troubling him and the Night's Watch, threatening that otherwise he would cut out his heart and eat it. Had Lord Commander Hoare received a similar threat to himself and his black brothers from Aegon I and his sisters, we might have a situation that is remotely comparable, but we don't.

Lord Commander Hoare didn't send a turncloak, traitor, and self-proclaimed king to abduct Aegon's sister-wives (or other members of his family). Had he done that, he would also have received a rather harsh letter, followed by Balerion's flames, most likely.

Jon is killed, most likely, not just because he decided to march against Winterfell, but also because the letter he read reveals that he had actually conspired to attack Winterfell beforehand. Marsh and his people have no clue that Jon only sent Mance to meet Arya on the road.

21 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

The Lord Commander may not be a king, but he holds the highest office on the Wall, and gives the commands, unlike the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, who may command his six brothers, but is himself commanded by the king. While there is presumably some means for black brothers to remove a Lord Commander from office in extreme circumstances, a handful of brothers passing judgement and execution without the knowledge or support of their black brothers is under no circumstances one of them.

And how do you know that this never happened or is not a proper means to deal with an oathbreaking Lord Commander? There is no hint in that direction. Perhaps there is even precedent for that. We don't know.

But we can be reasonably sure that an LC commanding his sworn brothers to attack the king, abandon the king in the hour of need, publicly denouncing the king, plotting against the king, etc. would commit offenses the other Kingsguard could (and should) answer with immediate execution of such a man - especially in times of war when there is no time to proper discuss or investigate an issue. If the life of the king seems to be in danger, you do your best to remove that danger.

I mean, did Ser Erryk knew that Ser Arryk had come to kill Rhaenyra and/or her sons? No, he just suspected it. And he immediately moved against his own twin-brother to ensure his queen and her children would not be harmed. That's how you react in such scenarios. If Ser Mervyn Flowers had reason to believe his LC intended to enter his king's bedchamber (just as Peake's sellsword might have entered Jaehaera's chambers) with the intention to kill him, his vow would have demanded he stop that man.

And so on and so forth.

Every black brother has sworn a vow. And when their commanding officers break those vows or seem to break those vows their lives are forfeited as much as their own if they desert. Else the vows of the NW would only be binding to the rank-and-file of the men and not the officers - which is obviously not true.

[Bael's Bastard]

12 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I think you're overestimating Jon's popularity and the amount of loyalty he has from people at Castle Black; truth be told I think Jon himself made the same mistake. The wildlings just want to live, they won't have anymore interest in avenging Jon, than  they did Mance who as far as they know was burned alive hell even Tormund who legitimately liked Mance has expressed no real interest in avenging the man, and the black brothers, at the wall, were never really uber supportive  of Jon before his radical policies, and finding out he let Mance Rayder(a man who many would see responsible for their brothers deaths), go to fetch his sister.   

And by his own words he'd be breaking his oaths by going to winterfel; which is why he doesn't ask any of his brothers to insist him in his endeavor; I see the vast majority of black brothers, seeing the killing as justified.

Honestly, to expect him to have really much support(which wasn't much to begin with), after letting the "savages" who've theyve taught to hate in seems bizarre; hell the black brothers from the north especially probably have been told stories of how the wildlings come beyond the wall to steal good wholesome northern women to rape(which admittedly they do-Jon himself after spending more than enough time with them to see them as human says they prefer rape to marriage), how they glorify murder, thievery, and cannot be trusted. 

I think you are underestimating it. Slynt and Thorne meant to have Jon executed when he returned to the Wall as a suspected traitor, before he was Lord Commander, but didn't have the support to feel they could get away with it. Jon very well might have rubbed more brothers the wrong way since becoming the Lord Commander, especially for his wildlings scheme, but there is no reason to think his support had diminished so much that the majority of brothers would have agreed with executing him justly, let alone a small group of mutineers murdering him. 

[Bael's Bastard]

12 hours ago, Trefayne said:

Bowen's heart was in the right place, but he jumped the gun. I suppose he could argue that the immediacy of the situation called for drastic action, but what he needed to do was contact the commanders of Eastwatch and the Shadow Tower and press them to confront the LC about his questionable actions and attitudes and to remind him of his duty.

Failing that, he could always ask the Crown for help and tell them that he was one of Janos Slynt's good friends.

Exactly. Marsh assumed power that he had no right to, and took action he had no right to. I do not doubt that he felt it needed to be done to "save the Watch," and did it knowing he very well might die for it, and his name smeared for it. But his hatred for the wildlings led him to murder his Lord Commander, showing no regard whatsoever for the Sworn Brothers and the Watch he is claimed to care so much about.

[Bael's Bastard]

12 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

What are you talking about? Jon literally read the pink letter out in public. Secret's out about Mance being alive. Even before that presumably the person (if it wasn't Melisandre) who broke the seal and read it probably knew before Jon's announcement and likely told others(Marsh and co for example). Hell Marsh and  Yarwyk where at the announcement to where they just saw in their and Jon's eyes announce he's going to break his oaths

A letter claiming Mance is alive doesn't change that "hundreds saw [Melisandre] burn the man," as Tormund tells Jon after he reads him the letter. The brothers and wildlings assembled have no good reason to believe that the man burned and killed was anyone other than Mance. Without proof, it would be an outrageous claim to anyone who witnessed his brutal death. Outside of Mance, the chosen spearwives, Jon, and Melisandre (and possibly Stannis?), nobody should know or believe it to be true.

[dmfn]

#1 words are wind. 'Jon said...' is no excuse for mutiny. oath breaking is also not enough. Headless men would guard the wall if every oath breaker was executed.

#2 worst lord commander is a pretty harsh judgement since literally zero people in westeros could make any other rational decision with an approaching white walker horde. They cannot just give the WWs 100,000 more wights

#3 even if he makes good on his threat to march south and take the wildlings, why wouldnt Marsh be happy? Thats two big thorns out of his side. Send a raven tattle telling on Jon to cover the NW's asses, and be done with it.

 

[kleevedge]

18 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Exactly. Marsh assumed power that he had no right to, and took action he had no right to. I do not doubt that he felt it needed to be done to "save the Watch," and did it knowing he very well might die for it, and his name smeared for it. But his hatred for the wildlings led him to murder his Lord Commander, showing no regard whatsoever for the Sworn Brothers and the Watch he is claimed to care so much about.

With that logic people have no right to overthrow a dictator. Jon Snow was a bad dictator in their eyes, ignoring what the majority wanted and threatening their lives by letting wildlings through the gate. He continuously broke his vows, what the Night's Watch stood for, and he was going to abandon his post as Lord Commander to fight in a war he shouldn't be in. Jon even knew he lost the support of the majority of the night's watch. Everyone has the right to defend themselves, and at that moment Jon was threatening all their lives by letting enemies through their gates and going into a war against the land they are sworn to defend. I'm not saying Jon Snow didn't have good intentions, but Marsh had every right to uphold his vows.

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I think you are underestimating it. Slynt and Thorne meant to have Jon executed when he returned to the Wall as a suspected traitor, before he was Lord Commander, but didn't have the support to feel they could get away with it. Jon very well might have rubbed more brothers the wrong way since becoming the Lord Commander, especially for his wildlings scheme, but there is no reason to think his support had diminished so much that the majority of brothers would have agreed with executing him justly, let alone a small group of mutineers murdering him. 

Slynt didn't execute Jon out of some fear of backlash due to the boy's popularity; Cotter Pyke had given them leave to execute Jon out right-Slynt doesn't want any question of him being just. Jon was detained in the ice-cell and there was no armed revolt to come out and save the guy even after Slynt said he'd hang Jon. And Jon was only elected in the first place through fear-mongering, Malister and Pyke voted for Jon out of fear Stannis would be pick the other-the men of their garrisons don't know Jon and simply followed the lead of their commander. Hell Slynt himself looked to be the one the most likely to actually win the election and it's clear he hates Jon and wishes him dead. Jon's individual traits were  not enough  to win a majority of the watch over in the first place. After his radical policies he'd be far less popular-I would wager even found loathsome and disgusting  by the majority of black brothers for his open door policies-the same people who months ago were trying to kill them get allowed in after plenty of them died to keep them out.After he declared he planned on breaking his oaths, I see no reason for why the vast majority of black brothers would not see his killing is just. Why exactly should the oathbreaker not be killed before he starts his war? Who exactly in your mind has the right to detain a commander when he's seemingly gone rogue?  Because the lord commander himself is not going to be seen as likely to agree to such a thing.

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

A letter claiming Mance is alive doesn't change that "hundreds saw [Melisandre] burn the man," as Tormund tells Jon after he reads him the letter. The brothers and wildlings assembled have no good reason to believe that the man burned and killed was anyone other than Mance. Without proof, it would be an outrageous claim to anyone who witnessed his brutal death. Outside of Mance, the chosen spearwives, Jon, and Melisandre (and possibly Stannis?), nobody should know or believe it to be true.

Again-Jon is not denying any of the claims; Melisandre is a witch, it's not unreasonable to expect some wouldn't arrive at the correct position of there was a trick;

[Minsc]

1 hour ago, dmfn said:

#1 words are wind. 'Jon said...' is no excuse for mutiny. oath breaking is also not enough. Headless men would guard the wall if every oath breaker was executed.

#2 worst lord commander is a pretty harsh judgement since literally zero people in westeros could make any other rational decision with an approaching white walker horde. They cannot just give the WWs 100,000 more wights

#3 even if he makes good on his threat to march south and take the wildlings, why wouldnt Marsh be happy? Thats two big thorns out of his side. Send a raven tattle telling on Jon to cover the NW's asses, and be done with it.

 

1. Jon wasn't going down to visit some whores. Jon was pledging to wage war on the Warden of the North. 

3. What does Marsh then do when the Boltons don't accept that defense? Rather instead come up and put down the entire NW in reaction to Jon's attack. 

 

Lets ask if Jeor decided to declare to the NW that he was going to make plans to march to war against Ned to protect Jorah. Do you think Benjen would have sat there and allowed Jeor to do so?

 

[teej6]

1 hour ago, Minsc said:

3. What does Marsh then do when the Boltons don't accept that defense? Rather instead come up and put down the entire NW in reaction to Jon's attack. 

 

Lets ask if Jeor decided to declare to the NW that he was going to make plans to march to war against Ned to protect Jorah. Do you think Benjen would have sat there and allowed Jeor to do so?

 

And what does idiot Marsh do now with the Wildlings and Queen’s men outnumbering the NW? And we don’t even know how many NW men supported the pomegranate in his mutiny. Do you?  What does Marsh do to appease Ramsay? Is he able to hand over Selyse, Mel, Shireen with all the queen’s men around? Is he able return Reek and FArya to Ramsay? He can’t do any of these things. You think the pomegranate will be able to reason with phsyco Ramsay and send him back? The moron didn’t think things through.

As to your assertion that officers have a right to kill their LC, quote me the part in the text where it states such. At this point, it’s quite reasonable to assume that Marsh is a dead man walking and his act is going to be seen and defined as nothing but mutiny. GRRM may give Marsh and his mutineers a small window where it seems they have the upper but that will be a very small window. 

As to your analogy about Jeor and Jorah, it doesn’t work. For your analogy to work, you’d have to have Ned declare war or Jeor and threaten to eat his heart out if Jeor didn’t produce Jorah. And if that happened, yes Benjen, in all likelihood, would have remained loyal to the NW. 

[Minsc]

2 minutes ago, teej6 said:

And what does idiot Marsh do now with the Wildlings and Queen’s men outnumbering the NW. And we don’t even know how many NW men supported the pomegranate in his mutiny. Do you?  What does Marsh do to appease Ramsay? Is he able to hand over Selyse, Mel, Shireen with all the queen’s men around? Is he able to give Ramsay Reek and FArya back? He can’t do anything of these things. You think the pomegranate will be able to reason with phsyco Ramsay and send him back? The moron didn’t think things through.

As to your assertion that officers have a right to kill their LC, quote me the part in the text where it states such. At this point, it’s quite reasonable to assume that Marsh is a dead man walking and his act is going to be seen and defined as nothing but mutiny. GRRM may give Marsh and his mutineers a small window where it seems they have the upper but that will be a very small window. 

As to your analogy about Jeor and Jorah, it doesn’t work. For your analogy to work, you’d have to have Ned declare war or Jeor and threaten to eat his heart out if Jeor didn’t produce Jorah. And if that happened, yes Benjen, in all likelihood, would have remained loyal to the NW. 

Marsh will likely try to secure the Wildling hostages to ensure their control of them. Stannis's men they can work with to figure out a solution. Be simply the NW expell them from the Wall and trying to explain the situation to the Boltons when they arrive. Something that would be a ton easier if not after attack against the Boltons by their rogue LC that wishes to be King Beyond the Wall. 

Any brother likely has the right to execute a brother that is so open in their breaking of their oaths. 

Ramsay only threatens Jon after Jon had engaged in warfare against House Bolton. According to the letter Jon reads Ramsay tells how Jon sent a party of Wildlings to steal his bride. Marsh and company are likely bright enough to realize Jon had been giving Stannis strategic advise. Thus another infraction Jon committed against House Bolton. 

 

[teej6]

22 minutes ago, Minsc said:

Marsh will likely try to secure the Wildling hostages to ensure their control of them. Stannis's men they can work with to figure out a solution. Be simply the NW expell them from the Wall and trying to explain the situation to the Boltons when they arrive. Something that would be a ton easier if not after attack against the Boltons by their rogue LC that wishes to be King Beyond the Wall. 

Any brother likely has the right to execute a brother that is so open in their breaking of their oaths. 

Ramsay only threatens Jon after Jon had engaged in warfare against House Bolton. According to the letter Jon reads Ramsay tells how Jon sent a party of Wildlings to steal his bride. Marsh and company are likely bright enough to realize Jon had been giving Stannis strategic advise. Thus another infraction Jon committed against House Bolton. 

You assume too much. Again, you have no idea the support Marsh has. As of now he and his handful of conspirators are in the yard with an angry giant on the loose, surrounded by freefolk and queen’s men. Leathers, Horse and Rory are there with Jon. How do you suppose Marsh is going to get out of his immediate predicament let alone secure the hostages? And you really think Marsh is going to be able to work with the queen’s men (they are more Mel’s men than Stannis) and Mel. How do you suppose that’s going to happen? Are Marsh and Co going to work with them or expel them? Make up your mind. I suppose you think Marsh is just going to walk up to Selyse and Mel and ask them to turn themselves over to Ramsay? You really need to read the books.

Quote me the text where is states “any brother has the right to execute a brother that is so open in their breaking of their oaths”. And Jon was the LC to boot. Don’t make assumptions and state it like its a fact. Judging from your prior posts, it seems like that’s what you do. 

But we are not talking about Jon sending Mance or not. Your question to another poster was what would Benjen do if Jeor declared war on Ned for the sake of Jorah. To which I pointed that the case with Jon and Ramsay is not comparable with your hypothetical scenario. As I stated, for your analogy to work, Ned would first have to declare war on Jeor (as Ramsay declared war on Jon) and ask Jeor to produce Jorah. In a scenario like this, Benjen would stay true to the NW and his LC.

[Minsc]

13 minutes ago, teej6 said:

You assume too much. Again, you have no idea the support Marsh has. As of now he and his handful of conspirators are in the yard with an angry giant on the loose, surrounded by freefolk and queen’s men. Leathers, Horse and Rory are there with Jon. How to suppose Marsh is going to get out of his immediate predicament let alone secure the hostages. 

Quote me the text where is states “any brother has the right to execute a brother that is so open in their breaking of their oaths”. And Jon was the LC to boot. Don’t make assumptions and state it like its a fact. Judging from your prior posts, it seems like that’s what you do. 

But we are not talking about Jon sending Mance or not. Your question to another poster was what would Benjen do if Jeor declared war on Ned for the sake of Jorah. To which I pointed that the case with Jon and Ramsay is not comparable with your hypothetical scenario. As I stated, for your analogy to work, Ned would first have to declare war on Jeor (as Ramsay declared war on Jon) and ask Jeor to produce Jorah. In a scenario like this, Benjen would stay true to the NW and his LC.

We might not know Marsh's level support however it isn't some crazy assumption he has some plans. I think it is even far fetched to believe he had no plans for the aftermath. Now that doesn't mean it will work out for him. 

So the brothers of the NW are meant to just sit around and accept any violation of oaths by their LC? 

Jon's sending of Mance to rescue Arya was Jon iniating the conflict with Ramsay. So in the eyes of Marsh and company Jon not only iniated the conflict he is now escalating it. 

[teej6]

14 minutes ago, Minsc said:

We might not know Marsh's level support however it isn't some crazy assumption he has some plans. I think it is even far fetched to believe he had no plans for the aftermath. Now that doesn't mean it will work out for him. 

So the brothers of the NW are meant to just sit around and accept any violation of oaths by their LC?  If Jon started pulling a Craster and began offering sacrifices to the Others that should be condoned? Jon was violating his oaths and surrounding himself with a Wildling army that they wouldn't have any way to just arrest him. 

Jon's sending of Mance to rescue Arya was Jon iniating the conflict with Ramsay. So in the eyes of Marsh and company Jon not only iniated the conflict he is now escalating it. 

I repeat, quote me the text that states “any brother has the right to execute another brother...” At least show me some indication from the text that this is even possible. Or else, there’s no point having this discussion. 

You keep repeating Jon sending Mance to save Arya and again I state that was not the point I was debating you on. If you can’t read my posts and respond accordingly, I don’t think there’s any meaning in this discussion. And Marsh has no idea that Jon send Mance to save Arya. Even with the pink letter being read, this is not clear to anyone but Jon, Mel, and Mance. Why would Marsh & Co believe it when they saw Mance die in front of their eyes? 

And I don’t think it’s far fetched to assume Marsh acted impulsively without proper planning. Jon was about to leave and Marsh reacted. That’s a perfectly reasonable assumption.

[Faera]

On 8/8/2018 at 5:18 PM, Prince Yourwetdream Aeryn said:

I hardly imagine Bowen Marsh in the bath telling why he killed Jon Snow as his face gets redder because of hot water. Would it work if he was more handsome?

I get the feeling Bowen will probably die very, very quickly for the unlawful attempted/successful murder of the Lord Commander. So, no... there will be no redemption arc as far as I can see. I wouldn't be surprised if the first chapter at Castle Black isn't Melisandre burning him and the other conspirators or the rest of the Watch just hanging them while Jon is still dying in his chambers though not yet dead.

[Minsc]

7 minutes ago, teej6 said:

I repeat, quote me the text that states “any brother has the right to execute another brother...” At least show me some indication from the text that this is even possible. Or else, there’s no point having this discussion. 

You keep repeating Jon sending Mance to save Arya and again I state that was not the point I was debating you on. If you can’t read the posts, I don’t think there’s any meaning in this discussion. And Marsh has no idea that Jon send Mance to save Arya. Even with the pink letter being read, this is not know to anyone but Jon, Mel, and Mance. Again, read the texts and posts your arguments. 

Ramsey's letter that Jon read aloud has Ramsey accusing Jon of sending Mance to steal his bride. Jon never denies this charge.  Nor Marsh has reason to doubt Ramsey's accusations. Is he supposed to believe a Wildling party just infiltrated Winterfell to steal Jon's sister from her husband and Jon wasn't involved at all?

[teej6]

5 minutes ago, Minsc said:

Ramsey's letter that Jon read aloud has Ramsey accusing Jon of sending Mance to steal his bride. Jon never denies this charge.  Nor Marsh has reason to doubt Ramsey's accusations. Is he supposed to believe a Wildling party just infiltrated Winterfell to steal Jon's sister from her husband and Jon wasn't involved at all?

Yes I corrected my earlier post. Even with the pink letter why would Marsh believe Mance to be alive when he saw the man burn before his very own eyes? Would you believe the threatening letter of a person you do not know and who is rumored to be a mad man or your own eyes?

[Three-Fingered Pete]

2 minutes ago, Faera said:

... I wouldn't be surprised if the first chapter at Castle Black isn't Melisandre burning him and the other conspirators or the rest of the Watch just hanging them while Jon is still dying in his chambers though not yet dead.

You know I've never given a moments thought to the possibility Jon won't be dead yet. It would be funny if all the "resurrection" speculation fans wallow in turned out to be nothing and those stab happy idiots just managed to miss any vital organs.

[kleevedge]

1 minute ago, Trefayne said:

You know I've never given a moments thought to the possibility Jon won't be dead yet. It would be funny if all the "resurrection" speculation fans wallow in turned out to be nothing and those stab happy idiots just managed to miss any vital organs.

Ya we never actually know Jon dies. What if he just Monty Python's us. Tis but a scratch

[Three-Fingered Pete]

20 minutes ago, kleevedge said:

Ya we never actually know Jon dies. What if he just Monty Python's us. Tis but a scratch

 

 

 

[dmfn]

48 minutes ago, Minsc said:

We might not know Marsh's level support however it isn't some crazy assumption he has some plans. I think it is even far fetched to believe he had no plans for the aftermath. Now that doesn't mean it will work out for him. 

So the brothers of the NW are meant to just sit around and accept any violation of oaths by their LC? 

Jon's sending of Mance to rescue Arya was Jon iniating the conflict with Ramsay. So in the eyes of Marsh and company Jon not only iniated the conflict he is now escalating it. 

Jon didn't send Mance to WF. He sent him to fetch a girl on a dying horse Mel saw in a vision. Everything else was all Mance.

In the military, you don't get to kill your commander, even if they're wrong.

Just like the WW threat, the Boltons could be considered a threat to NW since Ramsay is indeed threatening them.

Jon declared his intention to break his oath. Can't kill him for talking. Jon did so (yes, for personal reasons) but also to eliminate a very real threat to the NW, who are the last line of defense from the WWs.

Ok, fine, he was 'wrong' but two wrongs don't make a right. Is his death going to stop the WWs or the Boltons?

No fricking way