I'm not asking who you joined per-say. I'm just trying to figure out what side is the most moral to chose. I seem to have a insanely hard time deciding for myself so I wanted other people's opinions.

There is no right choice, or morally superior choice, that is the point.

Neither and both, they both have perfectly valid reasons for what they want. If it wasn't for the fact that the two questlines are functionally identical. I'd applaud Beth for making it.

The Stormcloaks, although they are fighting for their freedom from the Empire/Thalmor......causing the rebellion is actually making the Empire weaker and the Thalmor are gaining an advantage from it.

And even if the stormcloaks win and take back Skyrim, with the weakened Empire the Thalmor could invade again and Skyrim without the resto f the empire would fall also.

seriously? i think even the southerners would agree that they were on the wrong side of the issue.

The Empire. Strength through unification. And don't be bothered by the whole ban on Talos worship, because it's not illegal if you don't get caught.

The evidence is against it, but at the end of the day the Empire looked like the most ethical choice to me, even though the game tries hard to balance the two choices.

ZE EMPIRE, seriously though, the stormcloaks are a bunch of xenophobic racists, that want all non nords out of skyrim, so yeah....the empire wants stability, and they dont exactly like the thalmor as well.

I agree that it's a neat little moral problem. On the one hand, the banning of Talos-worship is particularly odious, especially since it was done at the demands of an invading foreign power with ulterior motives. On the other hand, the Imperial government can quite rightly plead that they had little choice, given the course of the war.

The rebels can rightly say that they've got a just cause...but then the Empire can equally rightly say that they're stuck between a rock and a hard place, and that the rebellion is merely further weakening the Empire and simply aiding the Thalmor by dividing their enemies. So I find myself in sympathy with both sides. Part of me leans toward favoring the Stormcloaks just a bit, but at the same time I'm not too trusting of Ulfric. Several people (in-game) have said that he's merely using an otherwise just cause to further his own ambitions, so there's that. But then even if he weren't using the Stormcloak rebellion for his own aggrandizement, it would still be the case that the rebellion is essentially doing the Thalmor a favor.

So you can see there's no really easy solution. Yes, it's wrong to suppress the worship of Talos - but do the Stormcloaks really wanna further split the only opposition force there is to face the Thalmor?

Imperials vs Nords is no different than British vs Colonists. Us colonists where not exactly "nice" to the other natives of the land either.

The term "xenophobic" is a bit over-strong. I don't know that all Stormcloaks want all non-Nords out of Skyrim, but they do want Skyrim to secede from the Empire - and while I think that would be a bad idea, can you really blame them? Nords have had healthy representation among the soldiers of the Imperial Army, including during the Great War against the Thalmor, and what was the result? The Empire agrees to ban the worship of Talos as part of a peace treaty.

Also, given the history of Skyrim and the fate of the original Nord settlement there, it's again a bit hard to blame them if they have a little resentment against foreign Elven powers telling them who to worship. As far as how the Dunmer seem to be faring in the eastern stretches of Skyrim, I don't like that, but such pressures and conflict are unfortunately common in areas of high rates of immigration. It's unfortunate, but natural, given the resulting economic pressures. Again, I don't like Ulfric's reaction to the Dunmer migration, but the problems that spurred it tend to be real.

I leaned more to the Stormcloaks, mostly because the coming of dragons is supposed to spell the end of the empire anyway.

The Nords wanted religous freedom, independance, and the whole of Skyrim truly feels like its all about the Nords.

The empire on the other hand has spread itself too thin, and seeks to bargain with the Altmer supremacists. This will be the end of the empire, even without the Stormcloaks pushing it off the cliff.

It really depends upon your point of view. You won't find either a 'good' or 'bad' faction.

On one hand you have the empire. They have been the status quo for centuries. Their power and influence was once a great thing all across Tamriel. Now they are a decadent and fading power desperate to hold on to their glory days. They have become corrupt and seem to have no problem handing over their citizens to their enemy in the name of "peace".

On the other you have the Stormcloaks, whose main flaw is that they are lead by a man who wants to expand his own power and glory. He seems to know how to motivate the Nords of Skyrim through all the frustrations and wrongs that the empire has done to them. They are very nationalistic to a flaw, but considering their beliefs have simply been handed to the Thalmor as a sacrifice without any say, I can almost forgive their hatred and distrust of others at this point.

I have played both sides and you won't feel 'good' or 'bad' about either point of view. Personally, if I had to choose one that is better than the other, I would pick Stormcloaks. Aside from their corrupt power-hungry leader, they are the only ones fighting for what they believe in. I can't abide an empire/government that would sell out its own beliefs and citizens just to feign a peace with an enemy.

Again, if you read the books on the great war, it was sign the treaty, or we wipe whats left of you country and people out. So its , bide your time and warship in secret, or get wiped out. what was the logical choice?

See, I can't even be that hard on the Empire. I don't get the impression that it's cravenness causing them to accept the treaty - remember that they fought very hard in the battle to liberate the Imperial City. They fought the Thalmor tooth and nail for a very long time. I get the impression that they accepted the treaty because it was that or total destruction. And while I sympathize with the point of view that it's better to simply accept total destruction, and make the Thalmor bleed for every kill, at the same time I have to ask, "Well, what if the Imperials' ploy works? What if they accept the treaty, rebuild their strength, then a hundred years later they drive the Thalmor out and reconquer Summerset Isle?" That would seem to justify the Empire accepting a peace treaty that is, on the face of it, utterly unacceptable, and it would mean that the Stormcloak rebellion is simply playing into the Thalmor's hands by further weakening the Empire.

Neither. I'm fully enjoying my later playthroughs without any civli war stupidity. I simply won't give any lipservice at all to something dumb like this in a game.

Better to fight and die for one's beliefs, joining your ancestors in Sovngarde, than to live and cower under the foot of oppression.

Self preservation has never been the better part of valor.

SKYRIM IS FOR THE NORDS!

Nah, but I hear where you're coming from. I think the only thing the compromise is going to accomplish is postponing the inevitable conflict with the Altmer anyway. Doing it earlier would have prevented much of the Altmer's ability to posture.

Really reminscent of WW2... hmm

No one is 'right' in a war. Both sides consider themselves right and their enemy wrong, but there are factiosn within factiosn on both sids with differing views as well.

Yeah, I understand - I just expressed that point of view just above. But look at it from the other side, the Stormcloaks' side of the argument. They justifiably feel extremely betrayed. They've certainly pulled their share in the fighting for the Empire, and yet the end result has been that the Empire has barred the worship of one of the Nine - and one who was not only a human, but a Nord and Emperor before his apotheosis. So the Empire is suppressing the worship of what is essentially Skyrim's patron god - obviously they're gonna take that rather personally.

And again, the Nords' history has been filled with struggle against Elves. They settled part of Skyrim in good faith and peace with the resident Elves (the Falmer) and then were virtually wiped out until Ysgramor and sons returned with an army to avenge the Atmoran settlers. Then more recently there was the Great War, where a foreign Elven power attacked Tamriel, and many Nords lost their lives in that war against Elves. Then the war only ends with the aforementioned ban on worshipping the patron deity of Skyrim - and to top it all off, there's a very large Elven immigrant population in eastern Skyrim, causing all the usual cultural and economic frictions. So it's quite understandable that there is some murmur of resentment against some elves. I haven't seen anything to lead me to believe (I'm not playing either Civil War faction questlines) that the Stormcloaks are actually racist against Elves, they just have a (quite predictable) consciousness of their history of conflict with elves. I don't notice the average elf in Skyrim claiming to be treated as a piece of dirt...outside of Windhelm, of course, where the migrant frictions are the worst.

Oh, there have been plenty of instances where one side was in the right and the other in the wrong in a war. I can think of quite a few.

Both are equal in pros & cons.

Long-term strategies like that might seem all well and good in the context of history, but that is a poor way to treat people in the short term. Imagine a situation on a more individual level.
Lets say this happens to you in real life...
You, your spouse, and your 2 children are walking to your car one night and are beset by a group of muggers. They demand all your stuff. A fight ensues in which you are hurt badly, but not dead by a long shot. The leader of the muggers offers you a deal. You get to live, but they are taking one of your teenage daughter with them. What do you do? Would you tell them to shove it and fight them again realizing that you might die in the process, or do you let them take your daughter figuring on the "long-term" strategy that once you get to safety you can contact the police and they MAYBE able to find her? Who knows what they might be doing in the meantime.

The latter option is what the empire chose and the Nords of Skyrim were that sacrificial offspring. I, personally, would fight back even if it meant my death in such a situation. There is no way I could ever accept the latter 'long-term' strategy considering the consequences.

The Empire. The Nords have been apart of the Empire for centuries, they never had a problem
with it until Ulfric came along. Nords have never been fair-weather friends.

I've thought about this a bit, when considering the actions of my character.

I really think the answer is neither. I tend to stay out of it if I could, based on a good morality.

They both have positives and negatives. But the negatives seem to outweigh the positives in both cases.

For example:

Imperials want to maintain order and some law and justice. But they are also brutal, and they seem to be pawns of the Thalmor after losing the war.

Stormcloaks want to regain their homeland. But they are also racists and brutal.

No obvious choice.