User blog comment:Zippertrain85/Why the Stormcloaks are right./@comment-166.82.242.97-20130507214604/@comment-6573099-20130508225653

"It's symbolic. If he can't protect himself, how could he protect Skyrim?"


 * partial spoilers!*

-If Ulfric Couldn't protect his city (or himself) against the Imperial legion, how could he protect Skyrim?

Same logic applies. Also, if it was supposed to be symbolic, why did he not face the solitude guard as well, or prove that he was a man of the people by taking that one stormcloak sympathizer with him who opened the gate? And also, is it really the best step forward to kill the high king to show you are better? If Ulfric was such a great guy, then why was he not elected High king by the other Jarls, obviously he was not as popular as he said he is. And now that I think of it, The Imperials are not the only ones who send a corrupt Jarl to run a hold. The Silver blood guy, whose family essential pulls all the strings the city, is now in charge of the WHOLE THING. The same family getting the silver from SLAVE LABOUR down in cidha mines is now going to RULE THE CITY. And how 'bout those other Jarls, eh? The riften jarl is oblivious enough to not question any of the happenings in her hold, or the Dawnstar guy who is willing to execute people he deems 'spys' based on their past in the legion service. And who can forget Vignar? This man allows people to steal from a rival family due to a stupid feud they have. Those are only a few of the notable characters, and what role models, eh?