Which would you pick? We won't have time to do both and would rather spend more time in one than rush from one to the other.

Brussels has never done much for me but I thoroughly enjoyed Bruges(sp?).Bruges is so picturesque with its town square;canals and lovely little streets to wander. How many days are you talking about?

Bruges without a doubt, I didn't find Brussels very appealing at all, however Bruges is beautiful for wandering around.

It does depend on your interests however

Havent been to Brussels, but we loved Bruges. We spent 3 nights there at the end of Dec and it was wonderful. Very easy to walk and just beautiful!

Another vote for Bruges!! I was in both cities last January and Brussels has nothing to offer, while Bruges is delightful. Lovely town.

If you can afford it stay at the Hotel de Tuilerieen http://www.hoteltuilerieen.com/index.php?p=/en/home
( It is much cheaper if you stay on weekdays)
It's a wonderful hotel, I can highly recommend it!

Brussels is a big city, and not a whole lot to offer tourists outside of fabulous chocolate shops. Bruges however is beautiful medieval city - downside is that it is filled with tourists. We went in the winter and it was still packed, but wonderful. I would vote for Bruges. How long do you have though? We spent one day/night in Brussels and 1.5 days/1 night in Bruges and it was perfect.

This question is like asking which one you should pick San Francisco or Carmel, Munich or Rothenburg, Florence or Sienna. They are apples and oranges.

I like both equally, Brussels does have a lot to offer, just read the guidebooks. It really depends on what you are looking for. Depending on how many days you have, I would recommend doing both. To me Bruges can be just as easily enjoyed in an overnight stay.

Bruges no doubt

Bruges with no questions!

Just wander around to all the great pubs and take the time to climb up the bell tower and look around.

Eat all the waffles you can! They don't make em like they do there here in the USA.

Having been to both cities I very much preferred Bruges.

Absolutely without question, go to Bruges!

Bruges (and I live in Brussels!)

Bruges, definitely! I was just there two weeks ago for a weekend trip from Amsterdam, and it was GREAT - way better than I imagined it would be. That weekend in Bruges alone made my entire trip totally worth it.

Brussels voted most boring city in Europe by a survey of some 1,400 travelers on Trip Advisor: http://euobserver.com/9/25826?rss_rk=1

"Brussels voted most boring city in Europe by a survey of some 1,400 travelers on Trip Advisor"

Clearly some people have never been to Birmingham...

about four years ago, doing a semester in London, I went to brussels thinking it was going to look like bruges (or maybe I got em mixed up) but I was sorely disappointed, there was literally nothing interesting there for me besides the good beer.

I'm going to try and fit Bruges into the plans this summer, it looks so lovely.

Bruges is veryyyy beatifull, bruxelles, hmm if you stay to center maybe yes, but for example Scharbeck is most dirty place on the Europe. Its my opinion and hard experience.

Another vote for Bruges just in case you haven't decided. Had been to Bruges twice and decided I had to see Brussels in 06. Just spent one night before flying home to US and it was plenty of time to see the Mannekin Pis statue (really little!) and the Grand Place (beautiful but not worth more than a couple of hours). Check the other recent post on the canal or cycle trip from Bruges to Damme. Its full of great info.

Don't know what else you've got on your itenerary, but Gent is also a great town with its very own castle you can tour and a beautiful bell tower you can climb.

Bruges - no contest!

to see the Mannekin Pis statue (really little!)>

what is really little - the statue or its xxxxx or both?