Jump to content

Immediate consequences of Jon's betrayal of the NW


Rondo
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Rondo said:

Jon gave a public speech admitting his illegal activities.  If that was not bad enough, he even told the gathering of his intent to lead the wildlings against the Warden of the north.  The men who took his life really had no choice.  

i personally think the only mistake jon did was that he didnt tell bowen and yarwyck about the letter(basically the important people in NW). rather than sitting with tormund and planning his attack he should have immediately dismissed tormund and called bowen and the others and shown them the letter, after that they could have had an agreement because ramsay didnt only threaten Jon he also threatened the entire NW in his letter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mustfly said:

ramsay didnt only threaten Jon he also threatened the entire NW in his letter.

Yes, people are forgetting this rather important detail. Ramsay will attack the whole of the Watch if they don't fulfill the demands of the letter, which they can't do as they don't have all the people the letter mentions. If they do not respond to the letter in some way, shape or form then they are essentially sitting there waiting to be attacked and die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes, people are forgetting this rather important detail. Ramsay will attack the whole of the Watch if they don't fulfill the demands of the letter, which they can't do as they don't have all the people the letter mentions. If they do not respond to the letter in some way, shape or form then they are essentially sitting there waiting to be attacked and die.

And even if the NW were to give into all of his demands..............which they very much can't; Ramsay has a reputation, for killing others who've given him exactly what he wanted anyway. So basically they're screwed no matter what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes, people are forgetting this rather important detail. Ramsay will attack the whole of the Watch if they don't fulfill the demands of the letter, which they can't do as they don't have all the people the letter mentions. If they do not respond to the letter in some way, shape or form then they are essentially sitting there waiting to be attacked and die.

That was Jon’s fault. His operatives infiltrated the Bolton household, murdered Bolton servants, and took Ramsay’s wife. That was an act of war. Jon is an idiot for thinking he could get away with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Darth Sidious said:

That was Jon’s fault. His operatives infiltrated the Bolton household, murdered Bolton servants, and took Ramsay’s wife. That was an act of war. Jon is an idiot for thinking he could get away with it. 

An act of war against a guy who was raping a little girl and his father who was allowing this to happen. Truly a vile crime of the highest order. 

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, SeanF said:

Efforts to justify or defend the Boltons always strike me as being similar to efforts to justify or defend the Ghiscari masters.

2 hours ago, sifth said:

An act of war against a guy who was raping a little girl and his father who was allowing this to happen. Truly a vile crime of the highest order. 

What I don't understand is that the Bolton defenders agree with the rest of us that Daenerys was morally right to overthrow/attack the masters because they were just awful, but when Jon does the same it's suddenly not allowed because it's illegal or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

What I don't understand is that the Bolton defenders agree with the rest of us that Daenerys was morally right to overthrow/attack the masters because they were just awful, but when Jon does the same it's suddenly not allowed because it's illegal or something.

I don't think all question if Jon was morally right from attacking Ramsay, just if the realpolitik is in his favor. 

Like an old argument was about the Ghiscaris economy (corporations are people too!), It's a no brainer that slavery is evil but is destroying it worth a potential worldwide economic depression? (I'd say yes)

Now here, is defeating Ramsay worth the consequences of adjusting NW precedence when it's very institution and armageddon itself is in question? (Again I'd say yes lol, but mainly because I don't like the NW and find the pitiful crow to act too much like wights. A war against zombies doesn't seem that big of a deal when they act like zombies anyway)

Edited by Hugorfonics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

What I don't understand is that the Bolton defenders agree with the rest of us that Daenerys was morally right to overthrow/attack the masters because they were just awful, but when Jon does the same it's suddenly not allowed because it's illegal or something.

You sometimes see people playing devil's advocate on behalf of the slavers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SeanF said:

Efforts to justify or defend the Boltons always strike me as being similar to efforts to justify or defend the Ghiscari masters.

The girl who was saved by Mance and Co may have been called a wife, but in actual reality she was a slave, sold by Littlefinger and bought by the Boltons, tortured and used as chattel. That should be pretty clear to everyone who is really against slavery. 

3 hours ago, sifth said:

An act of war against a guy who was raping a little girl and his father who was allowing this to happen. Truly a vile crime of the highest order. 

Sure, and especially when acting on the information that said little girl had already left the Bolton household and was in immediate mortal danger.

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

What I don't understand is that the Bolton defenders agree with the rest of us that Daenerys was morally right to overthrow/attack the masters because they were just awful, but when Jon does the same it's suddenly not allowed because it's illegal or something.

Which makes me wonder if social justice is really so important for these readers or if their purpose is simply to agree with everything a certain character does and to criticize everything a certain other character does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

I don't think all question if Jon was morally right from attacking Ramsay, just if the realpolitik is in his favor. 

I know, it's just some people here who go on about Jon Satan the Unworthy Betrayer who despicably attacks the lawful and righteous ruler of the North and his trueborn and beloved heir because he lusts after his own sister, also say that Daenerys is completely justified on moral grounds to attack the masters, which I agree with, but then if you accept this you really have to also accept that Jon's actions against the Boltons are justified in the same way. Both of them are taking action to protect innocents so they are both morally justified/have the same justification.

2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

Now here, is defeating Ramsay worth the consequences of adjusting NW precedence when it's very institution and armageddon itself is in question?

Well because they cannot fulfill the demands of the letter the Watch's choices really boil down to either sitting there until Ramsay attacks and kills them or attacking first to try and avoid this fate. They either attack Ramsay or mount a defence against him when he comes later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum can be so weird about trying to make certain characters the most evil creatures in Planetos (and I am not talking about likes of Euron) while excusing the negative traits of others just to fit their argument . Especially considering how Martin talks about moral grayness of people and the world.

The fact that some people seem to defend Ramsay Snow of all people just to have a narrative against Jon is odd.

Edited by Raven Princling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Raven Princling said:

This forum can be so weird about trying to make certain characters the most evil creatures in Planetos (and I am not talking about likes of Euron) while excusing the negative traits of others just to fit their argument . Especially considering how Martin talks about moral grayness of people and the world.

The fact that some people seem to defend Ramsay Snow of all people just to have a narrative against Jon is odd.

I'm pretty sure most either don't mean it or enjoy playing devils advocate. I honestly find that "Ramsay did nothing wrong" people, to be rather amusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"No one is the villain in their own story" - George R.R. Martin.  

Words to remember.

Bowen Marsh actually believes he's doing the right thing.  I happen to think he's overreacting, but he does have legitimate reasons for concern.

Jon's friendly relationship with Stannis is going to create problems with the Crown, especially their representatives in the North, the Boltons.  The influx of wildlings is a drain on their resources and threatens to destabilize the North, especially if they start raiding, either out of habit, or more likely, desperation.  And the mission to Hardhome threatens to be a disaster.  And now he's declared war on the Boltons

I happen to think there is little alternative to these decisions of Jon's.  Stannis is there, and he's the only one who helped.  And if he wants their supplies and forts he can simply take them.  Negotiation is best for both sides.  As for advice, Jon advised against attacking the Boltons and attacking the Ironborn instead.  Hardly unreasonable, even if the Dreadfort was set up as a trap.  And leaving the wildlings north of the Wall isn't really a good option.  Jon has done what he can, for example with hostages and the deal with the Iron Bank.

Jon did not set out to pick a fight with the Boltons.  He sent Mance into the wilderness to rescue a girl who he thought was Arya and had already escaped.  If everything had gone as planned, she would be in Braavos with no one the wiser.  Obviously, things did not go as planned.

As for what Mance Is doing at Winterfell, I have no idea.  But I don't believe for a minute that Jon deliberately sent him there.  Jon may be occasionally reckless but he's not stupid, and his own thoughts indicate that, as long as Arya is under Bolton control, he can do nothing to help her.  However, now that Ramsay has threatened him and the Nights Watch, he's stuck with a fight, albeit one he doesn't really want.

I suspect that Bowen Marsh is not long for this world, and I think he knows it.  I agree with the idea that he acted sooner than he anticipated; he got wrong-footed by Jon's announcement.  He and his men are badly outnumbered by rangers, wildlings and Queen's men.  There will be chaos, but I think Jon's supporters will prevail.

I doubt Jon is actually dead, but will be comatose for a while, long enough for fArya to arrive and be sent on her way to Braavos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...