I don't want this to turn into a ridiculous discussion of who's right,
I want this to be a discussion directed mostly at the Stormcloak supporters and their conquering of the western half of Skyrim.

My question is this: how can you support the Stormcloaks' decision of this?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for an independent Skyrim, but when you conquer another land that doesn't want you there for the "greater good", how are you any better than the Thalmor and Valenwood?

When you do this, you become exactly what you are fighting against: Restriction from Freedom.

When I encounter Stormcloaks with this question they say things like, "Gotta do it to free Skyrim."

My point is this: The Imperials say the WGC was a necessary evil and you oppose that. But you yourselves are using exactly the same method to capture Skyrim. How can you oppose the Imperials when you behave just like them?

Please be civil.

The war can't be won without Whiterun. Balgruuf wanted gold and he doesn't act until forced, so a new jarl is needed.

In addition to, the guy was repeatedly given chances by Ulfric to support or not until you gave him Ulfric axe. Ulfric was prepared to move, and had to issue an ultimatum. The other side sent exaggerated and falsified documents, and gold to get Balgruuf onto their side and to not make a ruckus.

And I often wonder, would Imperial players continue to support him if he sided with the Stormcloaks?

Do you oppose the Imperials?

If balgruuf became high king instead of ulfric yeah I would.

This isn't about Balgruuf, it's about your morality and reasoning.

Yeah.

Why?

Because the Empire failed its people. It gave away Hammerfell and left it to die. It gives up any worshipers of Talos to be abducted and tortured until they die. Nevermind that the Empire refused to help the Nords retake Markarth when the only reason they lost it was because they sent every warrior they had south to save Cyrodiil.

Why should some southron lord rule over me and mine from some flowery seat in the south? What does Medes know of High Hrothgar, or the war?

Even his gods are wrong!

It was the dragons we bowed to, and now the dragons are dead. Ulfric is the only king I mean to bend my knee to, the High King of Skyrim!

The thing is that most Nords have no problem with the Empire. They have a problem with the Thalmor. Although battles are fought and people are being killed, the Stormcloaks are relatively merciful. For example, I can't remember a single Jarl being executed by them at the end of the questline. If it was the Thalmor, we'd never hear from those Jarls again.

The method of occupation is similar, but the enforcement of laws isn't. Windhelm, the Stormcloak's capital, has Dunmer, Altmer, and Argonians. They don't lead the best lives, but they manage, and sometimes do well for themselves. The Thalmor, on the other hand, regularly purge areas of ANY foreign influence, whether that be genetic or ideological. And it usually involves burning corpses.

Skyrim started to become just that, and the Empire was spread too thin to appropriately defend them. As a result, the Empire was forced to allow the Thalmor to begin purging inhabitants under the pretense of the WGC. Of course, the Thalmor are somewhat restricted by this, but the rebellion is to stop them from gaining any more power.

Furthermore, this rebellion absolves the Empire of any obligation to enforce the Concordant in Skyrim, allowing both parties to amass armies in preparation with war against the Thalmor. My personal hope with siding with the Stormcloaks is that the Empire and Skyrim would work together in the upcoming war.

I agree with you. Do you know why I don't bow my knee to Ulfric?

He says he fights for freedom and free thought, but he forces Imperial supporters out of their homes when they're still, "weighing their hearts."

I guess I'm tired. I'm not really sure what you're referencing.

My question isn't one of rationality, it's one of morality.

The assumption of control of another idea is wrong. They may not agree with you, but you don't have to conquer them because of that. The people of Eastern Skyrim want to secede. That's fine, but why dominate other purple and suffocate their ideas?

What falsified reports? That Stormcloacks are ready to attack Whiterun which they are and do?
The reports were correct: Ulfric prepared an invasion in case Balgruff doesn't support him and that army came to Whiterun quicker than the Imperial one did. Lets not forget the fact that SC's do have a camp in Whiterun Hold and that Balgruff's housecarl mentions having to deal with SC's assassins.
Also, Balgruff supported the Empire from the get-go, just didn't want to fight unless he needed to. He allowed Thalmor to act, he accepted the Talos Ban and, in conversation that doesn't start due to a bug, he has a fight with Vignar over Talos worship.

Also, I find it ridiculous that people find accepting gold as dishonorable: Ulfric can offer military support while the Empire can offer military AND financial support to its Jarls. And financial support tends to be VERY important for proper governing.

If Balgruff sides with the SC's, most Imperial players would dispose of him and get the Battle-Born as the Jarl. Balgruff is liked, but he is rarely the decisive factor for the players.

Western Skyrim doesn't agree with you, so you attack them. You say that it's necessary when the Imperials consider the WGC necessary. How are you different from them?

Tullius tells Rikke to embellish on her reports to Balgruuf to get him to join the Empire.


I'm not some political guy. I don't preach equality. Might makes right. Medes doesn't have the might to be right, but Ulfric does - even if it's only because of me. Sometimes leaders forget that they're beholden to their people. Sometimes their people know it. Medes is reaping what he sowed, at least in my game.

If the Stormcloaks would just stop attacking, I might join them, but in attacking a people that think differently, the Stormcloaks become what they're fighting against.

I like the idea of the stormcloaks,But they will in the end make both themselves and the empire weaker.
and the man who will be King of Skyrim is just an Older version of Jofferey Lannister.
He sees the empire as the enemy,to an extent they are (If you support the stormcloaks that is) but the true enemies of Tamriel and Mundus itself are the Thalmor not a failing and falling empire,They need to hold the Empire together not tear it apart.

That's war whether you like it or not....

To stop the spread of Thalmor influence. I'd hate to sound like Heimskr, but the concordant is just a pretense for an ethnic cleansing. If the Thalmor gained more power, they would continue this cleansing. It would start out secretively, as it is now, and eventually end with corpses burning in the streets. Something that the Stormcloaks largely avoided.

Skyrim is also a powerful strategic location. If the Thalmor are allowed to operate within it, they could very easily amass as army and march South towards Cyrodiil. This would cause much more bloodshed than anything seen in the Civil War.

Then I'm sorry you feel that way.

There is a major distinction between the two as I see it. Sure, it can follow the same logic, but it will stand or fall on the merits it has in the given context.

I can just as well just turn the question around: How can you oppose the Stormcloaks when they will give the people more freedom than the Empire does?

This so much.

Maybe you didn't see, but I'm not a huge fan of the WGC. I'd rather have an honest and just leader, not one who betrays his ideals.

I don't support either. Both involve a restriction of a person's base rights: Freedom of Religion, and Freedom of Speech.

Visit Riften: Imperial sympathizers are arrested and one of them asks you to stay quiet about his dislike for Ulfric least the SC's kill him. The Imperials on other hand let SC sympathizers roam freely as long as they don't outright join them.
If you tell Galmar you want to think through about joining the SC, he will threaten you while if you tell the same to Tullius, he will respect your opinion.


The Thalmor capture worshipers yes, but the rebellion doesn't necessarily mean it would be good on the long roads. In case Cyrodiil falls and Skyrim fails to defend itself due to its military power being wasted in the Civil War, then... well, I don't think I need to say what Thalmor will do without any restrictions...
The current state is temporary. The Empire prepares for another war and reading Thalmor Dossiers you can see that they already accepted the fact that the peace won't last. And once it ends, the Talos Ban will be lifted and the Thalmor agents will get massacred by vengeful Imperials.

So it goes down to...
1) remove Thalmor influences now but the risk of Skyrim falling to Dominion increases (SC side)
2) tolerate Thalmor agents for now but chance of Dominion's defeat increases (IL side)


Hate can make one blind to reason. I find it highly unlikely that the two sides will shake hands and more likely that Nords will hope Cyrodiil kills enough elves that they can defend their own land from the Dominion.
However, what I think Nords don't take into consideration are the Ayleid ruins in Cyrodiil and the Dawn Magics the ancient Ayleids had. If Thalmor get their hands on them and Ayleid artifactsit is likely they get enough power-ups that Thalmor gets our stronger after Cyrodiil's fall.