Ned was willing to plunge the entire realm into war over his decision to put Stannis on the throne - Littlefinger stated it succinctly when Ned asks him to buy out the City Watch and its the reason he later turns against him.
Ned's downfall was that he was short-sighted. That's why he wouldn't take the throne during the rebellion (gotta get my sister!), why he made a terrible Hand (all he did was look for the cause of Arryn's death, not run the realm), and confessed to crimes he didn't commit (anyone could see the Lannisters were going to do whatever they wanted with the Stark girls, no matter what he did). Picking Stannis was a bandaid on a cancer that was spreading across the Realm, but Ned couldn't see it.
In the end, all he wanted to do was go back to Winterfell. Screw the civil unrest, the Lannisters taking over everything and, oh yeah, Others creeping up to the Wall. The dude had no ambition and no ability to make long-term plans. He was a reactionist. A cool one who I hated to see beheaded, but a reactionist none the less. That's why he lost his head.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, refusing to kill Dany was a short-sighted move as well, especially when she was pregnant WITH A MALE CHILD WHO WOULD INHERIT AN ARMY. Any properly ruthless noble would have offed her the moment she married a powerful husband. If she wanted to be a turnip farmer somewhere, leave her be. She was clearly being poised for a takeover, but again, Ned couldn't see it.
Ned's downfall was that he was short-sighted. That's why he wouldn't take the throne during the rebellion (gotta get my sister!), why he made a terrible Hand (all he did was look for the cause of Arryn's death, not run the realm), and confessed to crimes he didn't commit (anyone could see the Lannisters were going to do whatever they wanted with the Stark girls, no matter what he did). Picking Stannis was a bandaid on a cancer that was spreading across the Realm, but Ned couldn't see it.
In the end, all he wanted to do was go back to Winterfell. Screw the civil unrest, the Lannisters taking over everything and, oh yeah, Others creeping up to the Wall. The dude had no ambition and no ability to make long-term plans. He was a reactionist. A cool one who I hated to see beheaded, but a reactionist none the less. That's why he lost his head.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, refusing to kill Dany was a short-sighted move as well, especially when she was pregnant WITH A MALE CHILD WHO WOULD INHERIT AN ARMY. Any properly ruthless noble would have offed her the moment she married a powerful husband. If she wanted to be a turnip farmer somewhere, leave her be. She was clearly being poised for a takeover, but again, Ned couldn't see it.
This message last edited by badassashaman on 25/07/2011 at 09:52:42 PM
Ned Stark's downfall wasn't his sense of honor
25/07/2011 01:32:08 PM
- 1012 Views
Isn't protecting children a honorable obligation? *NM*
25/07/2011 02:33:16 PM
- 301 Views
Yes - protecting children (innocents) was the honourable thing for him to do. *NM*
25/07/2011 06:54:14 PM
- 337 Views
There are other ways to do that, and kids don't excuse law-breaking
26/07/2011 03:14:29 AM
- 678 Views
I disagree
25/07/2011 07:51:27 PM
- 880 Views
Doing right is more important than accumulating power
26/07/2011 04:09:57 AM
- 883 Views
Trusting people he had every reason to not trust was his downfall
31/07/2011 07:34:24 PM
- 703 Views