So I know you edgy tards love Hitler but what do you think of Napoleon?

So I know you edgy tards love Hitler but what do you think of Napoleon?
Should he have won?

Other urls found in this thread:

britannica.com/topic/Napoleonic-Code
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infamous_Decree
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Kremlin#Imperial_period
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Yes
Napoleon was everything stromfags wish Hitler was.

>A Jewish liberal.

He was slurping kike cocks like crazy. He literally wanted to make France the new Israel or something fuck this manlet

>Rothschild puppet
Who cares? All these wars were planned you fucking roleplayer.

A lot of Napoleon's reforms were very bad for society.

Based as a person, not good policies though.

He did win. Google the battle of waterloo , that was the seventh coalition. Seventh

he was playing the jew the way trump is doing it now

I don't know much about napolean beside the fact that he basically invented switzerland. He forced a constitution on us, sent us to school by force and gave us democracy.

I think if we really wanted to change africa, we need a new european napolean who simply forced them niggers to be civilized. It worked wonders on switzerland.

yes

napoleon is my dad

Stupid french manlet

Do you have a single piece of evidence for that claim?

This

Which ones were bad?

Well, he tried.

He is my historyfu

Don't compare him with that dumb austrian

plz come back

All he wanted was their shekels to finance his campaigns

Only regret is he leaded Europe against Russia instead of the Ottomans

YOU TAKE MY LIFE BUT I'LL TAKE YOURS TOO

you know europe is shit when a dwarf can conquer it all

He tried, and I respect him for trying.

He was of average French height for that time 168 cm, the Swedish average height at the same era was 163 cm.
Napoleon being a manlet was a meme created by the Brits.

The napoleonic code instilled traditional French values back into a society that were present before the revolution. It put more emphasis on a male driven society (we all know that is a good thing) however it really fucked over anyone who wasn't born into nobility. He also made educational programs to instill nationalism in youth.

Actually, he forced Kikes to abandon most of their traditions and assimilate. He fucked them pretty hard. In his mind, you are either French, either Hebrew, noth both.
You didn't have any orthodox jew in France after him.

>forgetting africans are nigs

Emancipation of the Jews was a mistake.

Napoleon fell by his own hand.
After the battle of Austerlitz, He had the opportunity to turn the Austrians into his staunch allies, instead he forced harsh terms of surrender on then.

It should be noted that in the last days of his Empire, he tried desperately to call on the Austrians to come to his aid, even marrying an Austrian princess, but they did not come.

He had no endgame, waged war for the sake of war.

>He had the opportunity to turn the Austrians into his staunch allies, instead he forced harsh terms of surrender on then.

Sounds familiar somehow....

>The napoleonic code instilled traditional French values back into a society that were present before the revolution.

He did literally the opposite.

>The Napoleonic Code, therefore, was founded on the premise that, for the first time in history, a purely rational law should be created, free from all past prejudices and deriving its content from “sublimated common sense”; its moral justification was to be found not in ancient custom or monarchical paternalism but in its conformity to the dictates of reason.

britannica.com/topic/Napoleonic-Code

Concerning education, he made it more easily available to the middle-class.

How so?

>relying on Austrians
Nigga, everyone knows that's a bad thing.

His ally could've been Russia(and we were, for a moment), but a coup happened and Pavel was killed and replaced by his son, who went on to tell Frenchies to fuck off on advice of the plotters.

> Should he have won ?
He did win user. He won won won, for about 15 strong years destroying all of the most powerful empires at the time (except for Britain, i give you that).

The administrative system he created in France is still mostly used today (préfets, codes civils), and very effective.

Also his nephew, Napoléon III, is probably one of the best ruler France has ever had with De Gaulle and Louis XIV.

> But noooOOooOOOooo he was so smaaaaallll xD lol cuck cuck

But nooooo lol he was so smaaaaallll lol xD

I hope you are joking, pretty sure google isn't blocked in your country.

Superb tactician, inspiring leader. Forever known for the urban myth that he was an angry dwarf.

He should have won.

>man of his time
>fully believes in the principles of revolution
>sees the mob year itself apart
>provides stability and safeguards the new nation
>learns from the mistakes of others; Louis was indecisive , Robbespiere was a dictator and Barras was an egotistical elitist
>lower nobility made himself emperor
>people under him could actually move up the ranks if they proved they could
>fought no wars of agression but one
>only war he instigated was against Russia because they broke from the continental system, which in turn was put in place to have britain stop funding the enemies of France
Literally the greatest

shoulda coulda woulda

he's cool... becoming the emperor a 2nd time after the exile, i don't know of other historical figures who have a feat like that under their belt. France was in love with him, even after defeat.

Corsican you fucking retard.

Pretty much all of this except for Napoleon III which was at best useless.

Daily reminder that Napoleon was everything stormfags pretend Hitler was

He was based, he created a lot that is still great in France, but the eternal anglo killed him because fear of Great French Empire running the world and killing every king of old dynasties because that was french did at the time

he made them adhere to French republic or being holocausted, you should take him as an example to your ahmed problem

He tried to answer the JQ but didn't really understand what he was dealing with so they destroyed him.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infamous_Decree

>Ghadafi tries to MAGA, using dinar-gold as currency
>killed by globalists as a warning

Isn't this a bit redundant?

>Destroying the most powerful empires? The Mamelukes of Egypt? the Negroes of Haiti? The peasants of Zaporizhia!? Oh behold, Alexander born again!

He couldn't invade a nation 19 miles away with every conceivable advantage, the best generals, an excellent and experienced army - well provisioned, a vastly superior population and larger, more abundant country.

He was an unmitigated disaster. Subduing Europe isn't even difficult - if you can describe Napoleonic Europe as subdues.

AND HE WAS A MANLET!

I read a biography of him by by an admirer (andrew roberts).

>He used to sit on his wife's lap.
>He really was a cuckold.
>The greatest (((man))) France has ever produced surrendered to sweet albion, not once but...
TWICE
W
I
C
E

>French
>Manlet
>Stupid

This is really redundant.

Napoleon would have created a united Europe that would have been unstoppable.

Alas, perfidious Albion.

>making the same joke twice

Napoleon did nothing wrong.

Accept invade Russia in winter.

his mask

and unlike shitler, he actually managed to at least win Moscow

he should have revived Poland and get the fuck out

I didn't ask you to point me for google. I asked you to back up your assertion that some shadow banker family paid napoleon to start the war.

>revive Poland
>leave Poland alone
>Poland gets rekt again

Right, Napoleon attempted to court the Russians for a long time, even getting them to sign an anti-trade deal against Great Britain(though it was never really enforced)

But the falling out between France and Russia wasn't by direct action of Napoleon. The relations with Austria are though, his top diplomats advised him to capitalize on how the Russians did "scorched earth" on Austrian lands after Austerlitz, and turn this into allies.

The vast numbers of Austria would have contributed to the last days of Napoleon's Empire. Austrian regulars would have supplemented the French forces in Saxony, instread of Saxon and Italian auxiliaries. No doubt turning yhe tide in the Rhineland

Napoleon>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Fagler

>After the battle of Austerlitz, He had the opportunity to turn the Austrians into his staunch allies, instead he forced harsh terms of surrender on then.

Reminder that it was the 2nd war in less than a decde that Austria had started against France
And even after they did it a third time in 1809, Napoleon still didnt remove the Austrian emperor from his throne
I'd say he was pretty kind with them

>Napoleon pushes to Moscow
>manages to get to it, but it's not the capital, kek

>Hitler pushes to Moscow when it's actually the capital
>falls just short

can't make this shit up

I read in one of his biographies that he loaded the cellar of the Kremlin with gunpowder and blowed it up as his army was moving away from the city, and that it could apparently be heard from like 20 miles away, but the explosion actually did very little damage.

Does that sound at all plausible?

>When Napoleon retreated from Moscow, he ordered the whole Kremlin to be blown up. The Kremlin Arsenal, several portions of the Kremlin Wall and several wall towers were destroyed by explosions and fires damaged the Faceted Chamber and churches. Explosions continued for three days, from 21 to 23 October. However, the rain damaged the fuses, and the damage was less severe than intended.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Kremlin#Imperial_period

HE WAS A TYRANT SO NO.

lets have a revolution shall we lads?

That actually happened, but the general left in charge to do this couldn't finish the job because the retreat from Moscow was hasty. One Kremlin tower was blown up and three more were damaged, plus some buildings and a part of the wall.

Napoleon was actually smart. Hitler was a mere German/Austrian

I should probably go back and reread that part.

also

>Napoleon-Alexander Bromance at Tilsit treaty

>surrendered to sweet albion
As well as your allies you disinegenuous bong
Wellington was a third rate irish pig farmer, stay mad

alexander is the worst friend ever.

Also Napoleon was based as fuck.

Hitler admired the hell out of him. Went to visit his tomb twice.

He conquered Europe twice. Hitler only wished he could do anything close to what Napoleon did.

A false prophet that failed due his own ego. I am pretty sure that autistic poltards will love him1

>Napoleon was everything stromfags wish Hitler was.
A failure?

Guess where Africa begins?
That's right, at the Pyrenees

>Guess where Africa begins?
>That's right, at the Pyrenees
I didnt lie at all. Napoleon when he had the upper hand chimped out and lost all his allies. Also by looking at the demographics or your country I am pretty sure that Africa goes beyond the Pyrenees

But his reforms is all Napoleon is. The reason he was so succesful is because he managed to implement a draft and just threw more men at the otherside.

He won a bunch of lopsided battles too.

He couldn't have kept fighting without the retarded level of troops that he was able to recruit. France had a bigger population than Russia at the time and after the Napoleonic wars France ended up having a demographic crisis that made them the punching ball of Prussia/Germany for the rest of the XIX and XX century. Napoleon with Robespierre doomed France forever

He was great.

Yes, that's why France was able to fight big coalitions on its own, but Napoleon didn't win wars simply relying on sheer numbers like Stalin did.

Yes. Russia would be better off.

>didn't win battles simply relying on sheer numbers
He actually won the coallitions due sheer numbers. His campaings in terms of manpower were extremelly costly

well the War of the Third Coalition was won at Austerlitz, wich was a lopsided battle Napoleon won.

>its about culture, not about race
French cuck never change

kek

This sweet butthurt, please never change Albion-kun

Hitler never led his troops into battle. He was a shitty soldier who escaped death a few times in ww1 and Napoleon was a master strategist who revolutionized light and line infantry.

>He actually won the coallitions due sheer numbers.

Lmao, you're blinded by asspain

>Le ignores the entire post frog.
Why are you so insecure. France just called a massive amount of levies proportional to their population which was bigger than Russia's. 3 million french died during the wars which is a stupidly high number specially for the time.

Wait, fuck

>3 million french died during the wars

Bullshit, France had 1.3 millions casualties, and barely half of these were death

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars

Stay mad and conquered

If only Napoleon studied Charles XII a bit more

Between 1791 and 1802 there were alredy 1.4 M French casualties. And this isn't countaing the bulk of the war.
>Stay conquered
You alredy lost.

Sure tapas, almost every single battle Napoléon fought he was in numeric inferiority, why do you think he is considered like a tactical genius and his battles still studied in West Point today ?

Yes because fuck the English scum

Mad because Albion took your taters away? Off yourself you dumb Irish traitorous scum.

>Between 1791 and 1802

These were the French Revolutionary Wars
There are dinsctinct from the Napoleonic Wzrs and Napoleon (that we're discussing itt) wasn't the leader of France during them

...

He only surrendered to you subhumans once, and it was only because of the Prussians.

>Napoloeon was well provisioned

The world's first Grand Armie did not come with enough supplies for a tenth of its fighting force.

You should take a look at the Irish Legion mate (it was composed from all type of foreigners but the officers always remained irish).
One of them, the absolute madman, kept playing drum after losing his 2 legs during an assault in Spain.

That was the prototype of the French Foreign Legion

Twice, actually.

he was the reason for the prussian reforms