Game Of Thrones Grown Up Talk. Do Not Enter Unless You Have Finished All The Books

[PanthersFanNY]

In regards to the post above:

 

I don't think that the Three Eyed Crow would betray Dany. Most agree that he's Brynden Rivers aka Bloodraven who is half Targaryen and was always a staunch Targaryen supporter. He also lives and works with the Children of the Forest, who have been enemies with the Others for thousands of years.

[SOJA]

In regards to the post above:

 

I don't think that the Three Eyed Crow would betray Dany. Most agree that he's Brynden Rivers aka Bloodraven who is half Targaryen and was always a staunch Targaryen supporter. He also lives and works with the Children of the Forest, who have been enemies with the Others for thousands of years.

yea that was all me , so it's probably 100% wrong

[teeray]

Hmmmm.... interesting read.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/55dcbb45e4b04ae49704bcf3
 

[5158Poundin]

I have been also wondering about that possibility….would not shock me at all if it came to pass!!

[Toolbox]

I'm dreading reading twow and having to wait another 6 to 8 years for the final book..

[5158Poundin]

I think GRRM is under the gun now that the tv series has caught up to the books (more or less) and will squeeze out the final book sooner than normal.  He is prolific a writer and I hope it's not similar to RJ passing away before he completed writing the WOT series.  It just wasn't the same to have another writer ghost-writing for many beloved characters in that series….I will wait and see.

[SOJA]

Hmmmm.... interesting read.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/55dcbb45e4b04ae49704bcf3
 

well fug me........but Jon :(

[stankowalski]

That wouldn't make any sense to me.  IF Meera and Jon were twins, why not then take Meera instead and let Reed take Jon?  Given all we know of Ned's character surely he would have thought of how this would affect his wife, and a daughter would at least pose no threat to her own son in the succession of Winterfell.

[SOJA]

That wouldn't make any sense to me.  IF Meera and Jon were twins, why not then take Meera instead and let Reed take Jon?  Given all we know of Ned's character surely he would have thought of how this would affect his wife, and a daughter would at least pose no threat to her own son in the succession of Winterfell.

...good point 

[Bronn]

I think Meera Reed is Jon's sister, and Jojen = Howland

DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNNN! I was on to this years ago!


Okay, maybe not the whole Jojen being Howland part... but...

I'm really starting to think the High Sparrow is Howland.

[Bronn]

That wouldn't make any sense to me.  IF Meera and Jon were twins, why not then take Meera instead and let Reed take Jon?  Given all we know of Ned's character surely he would have thought of how this would affect his wife, and a daughter would at least pose no threat to her own son in the succession of Winterfell.

I could see it happening... Ned was warden of the North and not too far removed from being in consideration for the Iron Throne himself... He knew that the minute potential existed for Jon to have a legitimate claim to the throne should something ever happen to Robert, given his royal blood by way of the Targaryens before Baratheon rule, and his Stark blood and the historical implications of it.

Ned had three sons already to carry on any legacies he might have, but he saw the potential for needing access to an ace up his sleeve should something happen to Robb, Bran, or Rickon. Look at what happened to Ned's brother and father at the hands of the previous king. Wars always happened. People always fought over the throne. They knew what lurked in the north, above the wall. He needed a fallback plan to keep order and honor in the North.

I think he took Jon for the exact reasons you think he didn't. He knew how the world was, and felt it better to raise Jon as his own, and teach him about honor and ruling alongside your people instead of over them. Think about how Jon acts at the wall, becoming LC and all that. How many times have we seen him turn down things that would benefit only him over his black brethren? Howland couldn't have those kinds of lessons to teach out in the swamps...

[Panthro]

DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNNN! I was on to this years ago!

Okay, maybe not the whole Jojen being Howland part... but...

I'm really starting to think the High Sparrow is Howland.

Id love to know why you think this

[SOJA]

I could see it happening... Ned was warden of the North and not too far removed from being in consideration for the Iron Throne himself... He knew that the minute potential existed for Jon to have a legitimate claim to the throne should something ever happen to Robert, given his royal blood by way of the Targaryens before Baratheon rule, and his Stark blood and the historical implications of it.
Ned had three sons already to carry on any legacies he might have, but he saw the potential for needing access to an ace up his sleeve should something happen to Robb, Bran, or Rickon. Look at what happened to Ned's brother and father at the hands of the previous king. Wars always happened. People always fought over the throne. They knew what lurked in the north, above the wall. He needed a fallback plan to keep order and honor in the North.

I think he took Jon for the exact reasons you think he didn't. He knew how the world was, and felt it better to raise Jon as his own, and teach him about honor and ruling alongside your people instead of over them. Think about how Jon acts at the wall, becoming LC and all that. How many times have we seen him turn down things that would benefit only him over his black brethren? Howland couldn't have those kinds of lessons to teach out in the swamps...

...this is also a good point

[stankowalski]

I could see it happening... Ned was warden of the North and not too far removed from being in consideration for the Iron Throne himself... He knew that the minute potential existed for Jon to have a legitimate claim to the throne should something ever happen to Robert, given his royal blood by way of the Targaryens before Baratheon rule, and his Stark blood and the historical implications of it.
Ned had three sons already to carry on any legacies he might have, but he saw the potential for needing access to an ace up his sleeve should something happen to Robb, Bran, or Rickon. Look at what happened to Ned's brother and father at the hands of the previous king. Wars always happened. People always fought over the throne. They knew what lurked in the north, above the wall. He needed a fallback plan to keep order and honor in the North.

I think he took Jon for the exact reasons you think he didn't. He knew how the world was, and felt it better to raise Jon as his own, and teach him about honor and ruling alongside your people instead of over them. Think about how Jon acts at the wall, becoming LC and all that. How many times have we seen him turn down things that would benefit only him over his black brethren? Howland couldn't have those kinds of lessons to teach out in the swamps...

I think some would argue that he didn't know how the world was which was what got him killed in the first place.  In any case, he would have still had access to Jon if Reed took him, it didn't matter where Jon was kept.  In fact Jon would have been much safer if kept with Reed given the Crannogmen's elusiveness which was stated many times in the books.