Stormcloaks VS Imperials - Arguments

[homeworlder1]

So i want to make this thread a place where we can discuss which sides we're on and why.

=====

Imperials

-----

The Imperial is the one who stand against the Thalmor. Read the "Great War" book, you'll see that the treaty is just to buy time for the Imperial to regain strength and prepare for a counter attack. Ulfric is a victim of a grand strategy, I can't blame him but he's real scum with his "rebellion". Ulfric fight for Ulfric, the rest is just smokescreen. It's Titus II who leads the Imperial to push back the Thalmor and force them to sign a treaty to end the Great War or all will be lost. Ulfric betrayed all Nords, Bretons, Imperials, etc giving their lives in the Great War. Clearly, he was throned by a bunch of mobs, driven by emotion to wage what he call "a rebellion", I call it a joke. Ulfric was suppose to become a Greybeard but then he leaves them to join the war. He's a hard head just like Delphine who keeping pushing Dragonborn to kill Paarthunax.

=====

Stormcloaks

-----

The Stormcloaks on the other hand fights for a smaller cause. They fight for independancy and try to maintain their traditions. And due to those traditions they turn mad when the Empire signs the treaty and any worshipping of Talos is outlawed. I fully understand them though. The very founder of the Empire is outlawed because of some elves. Ulfric basicly fights to maintain Skyrim as it is, regardless of the past. Though he seems ignorant towards the player(as the gray-mane jarl in Whiterun >:( ), People often counts the Stormcloaks as the good one, even though, compared to real life its a fight between the Roman empire and babarians.

=====

I'd like to point out that the Empire tried to chop your head off in the very beginning ;)

[Matth85]

We've had 2-3 major discussion about this the last month. We've discussed everything from Ulfric and Tullius, to real life comparison between the 2 sides.

 

I suggest you search and hit thoose up. I doubt we need 1 more thread where a few people argue over the side they prefer.

[Khorak]

It should be amusingly noted that in the fight between the Roman Empire and the barbarians, it's the Roman Empire who went around slaughtering everyone, taking all their stuff, and using them as slaves until the primitive slave and conquest based economy of Rome finally fell apart because it never reformed itself and lost everything. The barbarians then went on to form the nations that would define human civilisation as we know it, and made Skyrim.

 

Oh I forgot, people like to think Rome were the 'civilised' good guys. Uh...go Rome?

[homeworlder1]

We've had 2-3 major discussion about this the last month. We've discussed everything from Ulfric and Tullius, to real life comparison between the 2 sides.

 

I suggest you search and hit thoose up. I doubt we need 1 more thread where a few people argue over the side they prefer.

Blaaah. Details, details ;)

[Astaril]

So i want to make this thread a place where we can discuss which sides we're on and why.

=====

Imperials

-----

The Imperial is the one who stand against the Thalmor. Read the "Great War" book, you'll see that the treaty is just to buy time for the Imperial to regain strength and prepare for a counter attack. Ulfric is a victim of a grand strategy, I can't blame him but he's real scum with his "rebellion". Ulfric fight for Ulfric, the rest is just smokescreen. It's Titus II who leads the Imperial to push back the Thalmor and force them to sign a treaty to end the Great War or all will be lost. Ulfric betrayed all Nords, Bretons, Imperials, etc giving their lives in the Great War. Clearly, he was throned by a bunch of mobs, driven by emotion to wage what he call "a rebellion", I call it a joke. Ulfric was suppose to become a Greybeard but then he leaves them to join the war. He's a hard head just like Delphine who keeping pushing Dragonborn to kill Paarthunax.

=====

Stormcloaks

-----

The Stormcloaks on the other hand fights for a smaller cause. They fight for independancy and try to maintain their traditions. And due to those traditions they turn mad when the Empire signs the treaty and any worshipping of Talos is outlawed. I fully understand them though. The very founder of the Empire is outlawed because of some elves. Ulfric basicly fights to maintain Skyrim as it is, regardless of the past. Though he seems ignorant towards the player(as the gray-mane jarl in Whiterun >:( ), People often counts the Stormcloaks as the good one, even though, compared to real life its a fight between the Roman empire and babarians.

=====

I'd like to point out that the Empire tried to chop your head off in the very beginning ;)

 

For me The Stormcloaks are the bad guys so I am on the side of the Empire all the way!

I love the way Bethesda have done this as you start the game thinking the Stormcloaks are the good guys but when you read books and speak to people you soon realise that it is not so simplistic.

 

Delving into it I have discovered...

The Legion is the only chance Skyrim has of keeping the Falmor out!

 

The Legion has always been in Skyrim and Tiber Septim himself was a Nord who would be turning in his grave if he knew Ulfric was trying to undo all his hard work.

 

The White Gold Concordat was refused by Titus II at first but his hand was forced due to the terrible state they were in after the great war, he had to make a practical decision that would allow them time to regain strength and this was the only way to stop the fighting, one would hope that once the Empire is safely back together they will recognise Talos again.

 

Ulfric is a murdering cheat, he knew that the High King could not refuse the challenge, (I can't remember the name of it) but because of some kind of vote that left the High King no choice but to accept. He was set up and when he bravely accepted the duel Ulfric cheated by using the Dragon Shout. Hardly a show of strength to use a super power in what is supose to be a duel (fair fight) against a man armed with just a sword.

 

Ulfric is a racist idiot, he wants Skyrim for the Nords only and I haven't done any quests along this line yet but I believe he was also pretty terrible to the Forsworn, and killed lots of woman and children even after they surrendered. (my memory of this is sketchy though)

 

In the opinion of many (even Jarls allied with the Stormcloaks) Ulfric is only out for his own power and many think he will not lead them to this great golden age people are expecting, but to more war.

 

Apart from the part of the White Gold Concordat where they outlaw the worship of Talos, what other good cause do the Stormcloaks have to fight this war? there cause is stupid yet so many have died in this war just to put some racist horrible bigot on the throne.

 

In short the intelligent people in Skyrim will always be on the side of the Legion, because it is the intelligent choice, but sadly some Nords have more brawn than brains. :facepalm:

 

Go Go Legion!!! :dance:

[LobselVith66]

 

For me The Stormcloaks are the bad guys so I am on the side of the Empire all the way!

 

I don't think the Empire or the Stormcloaks are the bad guys. Tullius and Ulfric aren't perfect people, they are flawed men who are trying to fulfill goals that they genuinely believe in. Neither leader is some black hat, cartoon villain. Tullius believes in the Empire, while Ulfric thinks that Skyrim needs to be independent of the Empire. I don't see why people try to villify either man to support their respective faction when neither side is a villanous organization.

 

The Empire will continue, regardless of what happens to the Emperor or General Tullius. The same is true for Ulfric and the Stormcloaks, where Tullius contemplates the possibility of Ulfric becoming a maytr if the Dragonborn helps Tullius defeat the Stormcloaks. Neither side is perfect, Tullius has difficulty grasping with Nord ideals and concepts, while Ulfric doesn't pay proper attention to the needs of the non-Nords living in his Hold, but I wouldn't say that either man is racist or a villain. They are flawed, imperfect men. The lore of the Elder Scrolls does provide a myraid of imperfect leaders throughout the years, and the leaders in Skyrim are no different.

 

I like that Skyrim provides an opportunity to side with two factions that are flawed, and have their own respective good points and bad points, each with their good Jarls and bad Jarls. While both sides are opposed to each other, I don't see either side as a villain. They simply have opposing ideologies about Skyrim.

 

 

I love the way Bethesda have done this as you start the game thinking the Stormcloaks are the good guys but when you read books and speak to people you soon realise that it is not so simplistic.

 

You mean like the "Bear of Markarth," which is disputed by all the people who were actually living in the Reach, from one of the Reachmen to the pro-Legion Jarl of Markarth? You shouldn't believe everything you read.

 

 

Delving into it I have discovered...

The Legion is the only chance Skyrim has of keeping the Falmor out!

 

There isn't any evidence that either the Stormcloaks or the Legion can keep out the Falmer, if they intend to invade Skyrim.

 

 

The Legion has always been in Skyrim and Tiber Septim himself was a Nord who would be turning in his grave if he knew Ulfric was trying to undo all his hard work.

 

Why would Tiber Septim be upset that Ulfric and the Stormcloaks don't want to abandon worship of Talos, and want to remove the Thalmor from power within Skyrim?

 

 

The White Gold Concordat was refused by Titus II at first but his hand was forced due to the terrible state they were in after the great war, he had to make a practical decision that would allow them time to regain strength and this was the only way to stop the fighting, one would hope that once the Empire is safely back together they will recognise Talos again.

 

Which may have saved the Empire, but it doesn't mean that Skyrim necessarily has to follow suit, especially since we don't know whether the Empire will proactively fight back against the Thalmor and the Dominion, or if they will allow the status quo to remain until they are specifically threatened by the Dominion.

 

 

Ulfric is a murdering cheat, he knew that the High King could not refuse the challenge, (I can't remember the name of it) but because of some kind of vote that left the High King no choice but to accept. He was set up and when he bravely accepted the duel Ulfric cheated by using the Dragon Shout. Hardly a show of strength to use a super power in what is supose to be a duel (fair fight) against a man armed with just a sword.

 

So it's Ulfric's fault that Torygg accepted a challenge, because Torygg wanted to keep his throne as High King instead of refusing Ulfric's challenge and risk losing only his role as High King? And everyone knew that Ulfric could use the Voice - he used the Voice to defeat the Reachmen and reclaim the Reach for the Empire.

 

 

Ulfric is a racist idiot, he wants Skyrim for the Nords only and I haven't done any quests along this line yet but I believe he was also pretty terrible to the Forsworn, and killed lots of woman and children even after they surrendered. (my memory of this is sketchy though)

 

According to a factually inaccurate book, you mean. And when does Ulfric display his racism? When he allows the Dunmer to remain in Windhelm when he has full authority over his Hold? When he allows the Argonians to remain in Windhelm? When he allows non-Nords into the Stormcloaks? When he displays no problem with a non-Nord protagonist, even inviting him (or her) to purchase a home in Windhelm, and giving him the title of Thane?

 

Tamriel is a continent where many people are generally racist - this is nothing new, especially if you played Morrowind and saw the racism among the myraid of races, and we even saw it in Oblivion (specifically, Leyawiin). Racism is still an issue 200 years after the Oblivion Crisis, and it exists regardless of who you side with in the civil war.

 

 

In the opinion of many (even Jarls allied with the Stormcloaks) Ulfric is only out for his own power and many think he will not lead them to this great golden age people are expecting, but to more war.

 

Let's not misconstrue things here. Opinions about Ulfric Stormcloak vary, just like opinions about the Legion and the Stormcloaks vary.

 

 

Apart from the part of the White Gold Concordat where they outlaw the worship of Talos, what other good cause do the Stormcloaks have to fight this war? there cause is stupid yet so many have died in this war just to put some racist horrible bigot on the throne.

 

I'm sure putting an end to the Thalmor having their way with any citizen of Skyrim would be much appreciated. And Elsif doesn't seem like she would make a competent leader when she can barely handle being Jarl of Solitude, and she would likely be little more than a puppet leader if she gains the throne as High Queen.

 

 

In short the intelligent people in Skyrim will always be on the side of the Legion, because it is the intelligent choice, but sadly some Nords have more brawn than brains.

 

So people who want to remove the Thalmor from Skyrim and have the freedom to worship are not intelligent? Why? Because they don't want the Thalmor to kidnap, torture, and murder people with full impunity from the Empire?

[Matth85]

I don't think the Empire or the Stormcloaks are the bad guys

It's kind of ironic. You are the one saying you don't think so, yet you are the one arguing the most one-side of us all.

Really, if you mean that, you should stop blindly discussing 1 side and perhaps open up for the other?

 

And for the love of god, don't bring up:

You mean like the "Bear of Markarth," which is disputed by all the people who were actually living in the Reach, from one of the Reachmen to the pro-Legion Jarl of Markarth? You shouldn't believe everything you read.

As the book is as much a valid source as the people. In a corrupt world, you can't believe either. Don't try to argue that either, since I know you got some one-side argument for that too.

 

I am not kidding, you are starting to annoy. I am fine you arguing for the Stormcloak, but don't even dare saying you don't think either is good or bad. You argue that the Stormcloaks, and Ulfric, are godlike. That is even worse than what the rest of us put the Empire, and we do at least admit we see Ulfric as an idiot.

 

That said, I believe we got enough discussions going on. We just get endless discussions where it becomes assumption versus assumption, and neither is right. We got 2 big threeads on this, we do not need any more.

[KratosAurion777]

Actually i don't Like the imperial that surrended to elves , and i don't like the Stormcloak egoistic rebellion to .

 

I just wish To exterminate as many thalmor as i can . So i joined the Stormcloak Rebellion because it fit more this goal ^^ .

[LobselVith66]

 

It's kind of ironic. You are the one saying you don't think so, yet you are the one arguing the most one-side of us all.

Really, if you mean that, you should stop blindly discussing 1 side and perhaps open up for the other?

 

Since I already address that I don't think General Tullius or the Legion are villains, that I think both sides have issues and flaws, I don't see how you can make that claim.

 

When I see the villifcation of the Stormcloaks, I provide an alternative point of view. When I address that the Stormcloaks are focused on restoring Talos worship as a legal right in Skyrim, and defeating the Dominion, it's because it's brought up in the narrative as prime issues for the Stormcloaks. The new Jarl of Whiterun - Vignar Gray-Mane - addresses that he wants to build a Temple to Talos. According to Galmar Stone-Fist, "When we've reclaimed our homeland from the Imperials, we'll take the fight to the Thalmor. They are the true enemy. Make no mistake."

 

 

As the book is as much a valid source as the people. In a corrupt world, you can't believe either. Don't try to argue that either, since I know you got some one-side argument for that too.

 

Multiple characters attest to Ulfric being sent into the Reach because the Empire offered him and others in the milita "religious freedom." Are you suggesting that all those characters living in Markarth - including a native of the Reach and the Jarl who turned against Ulfric by arresting him - are intentionally lying about what happened?

 

 

I am not kidding, you are starting to annoy. I am fine you arguing for the Stormcloak, but don't even dare saying you don't think either is good or bad. You argue that the Stormcloaks, and Ulfric, are godlike. That is even worse than what the rest of us put the Empire, and we do at least admit we see Ulfric as an idiot.

 

I argue that Ulfric and the Stormcloaks aren't cardboard cut-out villains. I argue that neither side is perfect, that both groups are lead by flawed men, that there is no right or wrong because people are making choices about what they think is best. I don't see why you, and others, are so intent on making this such a black and white debate.

 

 

That said, I believe we got enough discussions going on. We just get endless discussions where it becomes assumption versus assumption, and neither is right. We got 2 big threeads on this, we do not need any more.

 

I think the entire crux of the storyline is that it's a dichotomy between opposing views - neither side is supposed to be right, both of them simply have their own views.

[Matth85]

Since I already address that I don't think General Tullius or the Legion are villains, that I think both sides have issues and flaws, I don't see how you can make that claim.

Your 1 sentence "I think neither are good or bad!" Versus a few books of you telling how awesome Ulfric is? Your replies favour the Stormcloak massively. That alone is enough to make that claim. If you mean something else, perhaps ease up on your Stormcloak crusade?

 

Are you suggesting that all those characters living in Markarth - including a native of the Reach and the Jarl who turned against Ulfric by arresting him - are intentionally lying about what happened?

How hard do you think it is to make soembody lie? If Ulfric did, and I am not saying he did, slaughter half of Markarth, I believe nobody would dare talk against the man. At least not when he killed the High King and got a chance for the throne. Remember, the majority isn't always right. If a city says something, they might not tell the truth. Wether it's true or not is irrelevant: We got as much profo there as the books give us. If you want to throw the book out of the discussion, you might as well throw this out. It's assumptions either way, unless we get some hard facts and a source of it.

 

I argue that Ulfric and the Stormcloaks aren't cardboard cut-out villains. I argue that neither side is perfect, that both groups are lead by flawed men, that there is no right or wrong because people are making choices about what they think is best. I don't see why you, and others, are so intent on making this such a black and white debate.

If we put it as black and white, it is our bussiness. But let me tell you, you do a great job at it yourself. If you didn't add the line "This isn't black and white!" every now and then, I would have believed you were all out Stormcloak fan. I have yet to see you do anything than dismiss every argument against the Stormcloak, and use your own assumption as facts. Is that really different from seing it black and white?

 

 

think the entire crux of the storyline is that it's a dichotomy between opposing views - neither side is supposed to be right, both of them simply have their own views.

POlitics in a nutshell. Yes, it's very well done. However, that wasn't the point of my post, or my sentence there. Let me rephrase:

 

1) If you really look at this as a greyzone, you should ease up on your crusade to dismiss every argument against the Stormcloak.

2) We don't need more threads on this subject, not when the 2 others are regulary on the front page. We got a topic rolling on the exact same, and we got one about Ulfric. This is getting more spam than anything.