Who would you have voted to be Lord Commander?

[King17]

1 minute ago, saltedmalted said:

it doesn't help his greater goal but it helps the North enormously. With the Boltons gone the Northmen will stop caring what KL says.

Executing Northern hostages will not bring Bolton back.

Tell that to GRRM, not us. 

It doesn't have to bring bolton back it just has to prevent the rest of the north from marching for stannis which it will.

[saltedmalted]

2 minutes ago, King17 said:

It doesn't have to bring bolton back it just has to prevent the rest of the north from marching for stannis which it will.

Enough Northmen are already marching with Stannis. If you have a problem with that take it up with GRRM.

The next book will see the end of the Boltons (if George ever manages to finish it).

[King17]

2 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

Yep, and how much of the North is working with Tywin? Because he needs most of it to accept him, and right know, only the Bolton's are on his side, maybe the Dustin's/Rysewels, but the rest are not on his side.

 

The Tyrells know he's not, likely their bannermen do too.

The Northerners, the Valemen, Stormlands, Crownlanders, Dornish, and Riverlanders think he's not legitimate.

Tywin has about half the north working for him so I imagine it's working out well. Even if stannis were somehow to rally the rest of the north what good would it do him? Robb virtually had no chance why should stannis do any better?

[King17]

2 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

Enough Northmen are already marching with Stannis. If you have a problem with that take it up with GRRM.

The next book will see the end of the Boltons (if George ever manages to finish it).

And he will still only have half the north marching with him and still have no chance of victory.

[CamiloRP]

1 minute ago, King17 said:

Tywin has about half the north working for him so I imagine it's working out well. Even if stannis were somehow to rally the rest of the north what good would it do him? Robb virtually had no chance why should stannis do any better?

No, he has the Boltons, and maybe the Rysewels and Dustins, the rest are in various different plots against him. Stannis could do better than Robb because Robb  wanted emancipation, which would put him against all other  kingdoms. 

But none of this matters, we are talking about whether or not Stannis is a rebel, and he's not. Like @Walda said so perfectly before, in wars of succession both sides are correct until one wins, therefore, the Watch should treat them both as Kings, and when the king makes a request, you obey.

 

[saltedmalted]

12 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

Eh it was kinda strong. His mother was princess Isabella, daughter of Philip iv.

It doesn't work like that. John the Posthumous was Louis X's heir, once he died Jeanne became the heir.

After Jeanne her uncle Philip would have the strongest claim (over Isabella's). So Edward's bloodclaim would still lose to the descendants of Philip.

[King17]

1 minute ago, CamiloRP said:

No, he has the Boltons, and maybe the Rysewels and Dustins, the rest are in various different plots against him. Stannis could do better than Robb because Robb  wanted emancipation, which would put him against all other  kingdoms. 

But none of this matters, we are talking about whether or not Stannis is a rebel, and he's not. Like @Walda said so perfectly before, in wars of succession both sides are correct until one wins, therefore, the Watch should treat them both as Kings, and when the king makes a request, you obey.

 

Name a single kingdom stannis controls. Oh wait that's right basically none 

[saltedmalted]

4 minutes ago, King17 said:

And he will still only have half the north marching with him and still have no chance of victory.

Maybe, but that will not stop GRRM from writing what he wants.

[The Young Maester]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

After Jeanne her uncle Philip would have the strongest claim (over Isabella's). So Edward's bloodclaim would still lose to the descendants of Philip.

It still makes his claim stronger than the Valois king. The Valois were cousins to the capets, whilst Edward was the grandson to the main line

[saltedmalted]

Just now, King17 said:

Name a single kingdom stannis controls. Oh wait that's right basically none 

Legalese doesn't matter, Stannis was at Eastwatch and the Lannisters were not. End of story.

[saltedmalted]

1 minute ago, The Young Maester said:

It still makes his claim stronger than the Valois king. The Valois were cousins to the capets, whilst Edward was the grandson to the main line

Should have thought about that before he recognised him as king.

[CamiloRP]

1 minute ago, King17 said:

Name a single kingdom stannis controls. Oh wait that's right basically none 

Against, try to argue against what I say, not just say shit. He controls little of the Crownlanders, little of the Stormlands and little of the North, that's true, yet it doesn't make him claim any less legitimate, he's not a rebell but a claimant, and the Watch should treat any claimant as the true king, that's what neutrality means.

[CamiloRP]

2 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

Legalese doesn't matter, Stannis was at Eastwatch and the Lannisters were not. End of story.

That's not even legalese, it's a 'manotazo de ahogado' meaning, reaching because you have no actual good faith argument.

[The Young Maester]

1 minute ago, saltedmalted said:

Should have thought about that before he recognised him as king.

Eh its the Middle Ages, people will always retract something and do a complete u-turn.

[King17]

10 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

Against, try to argue against what I say, not just say shit. He controls little of the Crownlanders, little of the Stormlands and little of the North, that's true, yet it doesn't make him claim any less legitimate, he's not a rebell but a claimant, and the Watch should treat any claimant as the true king, that's what neutrality means.

Neutrality means not aiding any side.

[King17]

12 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

Legalese doesn't matter, Stannis was at Eastwatch and the Lannisters were not. End of story.

That's irrelevant stannis is likely to lose and the lannisters are not likely to forget the watch helped him.

[King17]

12 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

Against, try to argue against what I say, not just say shit. He controls little of the Crownlanders, little of the Stormlands and little of the North, that's true, yet it doesn't make him claim any less legitimate, he's not a rebell but a claimant, and the Watch should treat any claimant as the true king, that's what neutrality means.

In other words he is a king without a kingdom and is no more a king than the the riverlands lady who had Robb's crown was a queen.

[saltedmalted]

Just now, King17 said:

That's irrelevant stannis is likely to lose and the lannisters are not likely to forget the watch helped him.

Are you even reading the posts? Stannis is the immediate problem. The Lannisters won't matter if the Watch angers Stannis.

No, the Watch did not have enough men to defeat Stannis and still remain as anything but a shadow of its depleted self.

[saltedmalted]

Just now, King17 said:

In other words he is a king without a kingdom and is no more a king than the the riverlands lady who had Robb's crown was a queen.

If you care for legalese:

1) Stannis is a contender so they cannot just refuse (or accept him).

If you don't care for legalese:

2) Stannis had the might to hurt the Watch now.

The Watch didn't have the luxury of acting the way you would want it to.

[King17]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

Are you even reading the posts? Stannis is the immediate problem. The Lannisters won't matter if the Watch angers Stannis.

No, the Watch did not have enough men to defeat Stannis and still remain as anything but a shadow of its depleted self.

Stannis would turn the rest of the north against him if he attacked the watch and stannis army is small he would win in an actual fight sure but stannis cannot really afford any more bloodshed or his forces would be decimated even further.