User blog comment:Zippertrain85/Why the Stormcloaks are right part 2/@comment-9156240-20130604214324

To be honest, I find the terms "Right" and "Wrong" along with the claims that the "Stormcloaks were right!" and the "Stormcloaks were wrong!" way too opinionated.

The entire point of the questline is that neither group is more appealing than the other. They both have their good points and bad points.

However, I find some of your arguments a bit lacking anyways, and I just wanted to say a few things- not just to argue for the Imperials.


 * "Ulfric is racist."


 * If you want proof on Brunwulf fighting in the Great War, you might as well be asking for proof on whether or not anything actually happened pre-game. How do you know the Great War ever even happened? You don't. You rely on in-game dialogue and the in-game books. In reality, you have no idea whether any of that actually happened or if, in fact, everyone in Skyrim is lying to your face. The "proof" you're looking for comes from his mouth and from what other characters say about him. You could also take note that he is the only Jarl without a housecarl and is always wearing armor. He also takes part in fights if the Dragonborn is being attacked. These things could be examples of military experience.


 * General Tullius would know to make Brunwulf Jarl just as he would know to make anyone else Jarl: they are a capable individual with good leadership skills and experience. Just because they become Jarl doesn't mean they are an Imperial spy. Maven Black-Briar becomes Jarl, but I highly doubt that she's a spy, as she is the most powerful individual in all of Skyrim and likely answers to no one. HOWEVER, that is merely a speculation, just as your claim of him being a spy is a speculation. Solid evidence is necessary when trying to support a claim, and so far I have seen none. Perhaps finding a note in his home addressed to an Imperial leader would suffice, but there is no such thing.


 * The bounty does not count as appropriate evidence. Every Jarl gives out bounties. Claiming that such a thing is evidence that Ulfric helps minorities is not sufficient since it's part of the A.I. Even IF it could count, you still make an assumption that travelers mean minorities. Nords can travel in Skyrim as well, in fact, it's far more likely, seeing as how there is a higher population of Nords than any other race in Skyrim.


 * The whole "Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" is a lousy excuse to let people die. That phrase should only ever be used if the consequences are dire and there is no possible way to save everyone. It is very possible for Ulfric to save a Nordic village and save a Kajiit caravan. That sort of mentality isn't appropriate for the sort of situation you set up.


 * "Nobody enforced the Talos worship ban until Ulfric and his men made a fuss about it."


 * Whether or not it seems accurate, this is said in-game by Alvor. Physcial proof as such overpowers your theories, unfortunately enough. While it does, in a sense, seem unreasonable and strange, there is evidence proving this is actually true. Even while playing in the game, the Thalmor are really only seen on the road and in Markarth. Even then they are mainly dealing with Stormcloaks and such. They don't even root out Talos worship on their own, and instead they ask the Dragonborn to do it for them.


 * The Thalmor still don't really enforce the Talos worship ban. There are Talos shrines scattered all over Skyrim that are still intact. There is an entire building in Markarth dedicated to Talos, a huge shrine in Whiterun, and a small shrine in Riften. If the Thalmor were really that serious, they would have these shrines taken down or blocked off from the public. This evidence makes Ulfric's cause seem baseless.


 * "Skyrim belongs to the Snow Elves."


 * To be honest, this point does seem weak, but not for the reasons your've stated. To clear this up, the Snow Elves are actually victims in a sense. While they made a poor decision in choosing to fight the Nords, their end (or at least de-evolution) was much too cruel and horrid. FIRST, you need to make sure you stop mashing together the civilians and the leaders who make decisions along with the elves who choose to support said decisions. Simply because Snow elf rulers decide to wage war on Nords doesn't mean that their subjects decided to. When the Snow Elves were defeated and forced underground, the innocents were forced under as well. The Nords then went on a killing ramage, exterminating thousands at a time, when, instead, they should have offered the Snow Elves a chance to live above ground, so long as they didn't try to kill them. The Falmer were forced to eat poisoness fungus which blinded them. They were tortured by the Dwemer and treated as slaves. They may not be the only victims in the entire ordeal, but they have definitely gone through much more suffering than was necessary.


 * The reason I believe this claim is weak, is because the Snow Elves don't techinically rule over Skyrim. It's similar to saying that America belongs to the Indians, and not the Americans. The land should belong to the Indians, but it doesn't because the Americans (or British, I suppose) took it from them. And while it's debatable whether or not the land should belong to the Snow Elves because of their crimes, the land doens't. And that's that.


 * Uhm... I believe the word you're looking for is secede and not succeed. "Torygg would have seceded if Ulfric had asked him to."


 * It is said in-game that Torygg repsected Ulfric. Torygg- being a successor and not exactly the most experienced king or militarist, was probably unsure of what to do. The reason he didn't secede beforehand is likely because he was uncertain how to or whether to. If Ulfric had asked him to, provided sufficient evidence on why it was a good idea to do so, and told Torygg any plans he had on doing so without having millions slaughtered, Torygg would have had little reason not to secede.


 * "Ulfric acted childish at the meeting at High Hrothgar."


 * I'm skipping this claim because I don't think it has anything to do with whether Ulfric's cause is good/bad or right/wrong.


 * "Ulfric is a bad leader because he got captured at the beginning of the game."


 * Perhaps you need to look more into the context of Ulfric's incarceration. It's said in-game that Ulfric was ambushed by General Tullius. Here, Tullius outsmarted Ulfric. Whether it was through spies or Ulfric making a predicatable move, it shows that Tullius was the better miliarist here. Before you say that having spies does not prove anything about Tullius's smarts, I'm going to say that it does. There is an Art to War, and only certain leaders are able to master it. Knowing how to attain spies and have all the right people in all the right places is part of the Art of War. Tullius clearly has the right people in the right places, as he's able to ambush Ulfric while he has few body guards.


 * Ulfric also surrenders. "Pretty meekly, too. So much for his death and glory mission", as Hadvar puts it. While it is said that he did this to protect the men he had with him, this does little to argue the point. He should have known that they'd be destined for the chopping block if they were captured. There would have been a higher chance of them surviving if they attempted to confuse the Imperials just long enough to make a getaway. How could Ulfric have ever expected Alduin to arrive at the last minute and save some of his men?


 * Ulfric being out in the field is not uncommon for the Imperials. General Tullius is out in the filed constantly, perhaps even moreso, considering he is still a soldier like all the rest of them. General Tullius is also more compassionate than Ulfric. While the dragon is attacking, Tullius and the Imperials are actually trying to help save people while Ulfric and his Stormcloaks hide or run away. Either way, trying to make Ulfric look better than Tullius doesn't seem like the way to go about defending his cause...