Whos better? Napoleon or Hitler

Whos better? Napoleon or Hitler

...

Napoleon is quite a lot better as a military commander than Hitler is.

...

Well Napoleon surrendered to the British twice.
Hitler killed himself because he knew he would be surrendering to a far less magnanimous enemy.

Define better? Hitler's Germany would obliterated Napoleon's France but their is a significant tech advantage. I'd actually say that Hitler achieved more global dominance and from less auspicious beginnings. It's just fashionable to downplay his achievements because he's literally hitler.

I'd say the failed artist >> The cuck of corsica

Napoleon.

He literally outplayed the whole Europe, starting in France, through Great Brittain, ending on the Holy Roman Empire.

All Hitler had was technology, and war.
He never even seeked peaceful ways of dealing with the enemies, his only way of beating an enemy was full anexion.

Attila or Genghis?

Napo no doubt about it, Hitler is pretty close tho

a few dozen fur trappers does not equal an empire

Attila basically just pillaged the decaying remains of Rome (which they couldn't even protect) and managed to lose the decisive battle against the west. Then he died and his empire collapsed.

Napoleon, he dominated for longer, was an actual military genius, and he continues to influence us today.

probably Ghengis, Attila was a really big threat and certainly caused the WRE to collapse faster but like 50 years after his death it was if nothing had changed.

>He never even seeked peaceful ways of dealing with the enemies
Hitler sought peace several times, even offering to pay reparations. It's the Allies who refused to negotiate.

Attila would have taken Rome if they hadn't paid him off.

IMO Hitler was the better statesman, Napoleon was the better military leader

>Hitler sought peace several times, even offering to pay reparations. It's the Allies who refused to negotiate.
Literally after 4th or so time he said "This is the last time I annex something"

Napoleon. As a military commander Hitler was shit

Napoleon.
One of the best military commander m8

Rome as a city was irrelevant by then

Napoleon did better against Russia than Hitler, so I'll go with him.

Napoleon

Napoleon was alone and France was weak, while Hitler possessed allies and Germany was strong.

from a thread on /his/

Napoleon, save for that on Russia to which he was confronted in hopes of preserving the continental blockade that was to bring peace unto Europe, never outright declared any wars, and all those he waged bore only a defensive purpose, rather than be wars of aggressions and expansion.

Besides, Napoleon, although by near-tyrannical means, pursued the legacy of the French Revolution, in edifying all its founding values as pillars of the french empire (loss of privileges, equality before the law, etc...) while purging from it that which had been tagged unto it by Robespierre and the Directory of Public Safeguard. Furthermore, all the countries in which his armies were to tread spread those ideals into Europe, shaping a century of nationalism and democracy that was to come.

Lastly, he didn't will the entire genocide of the Semite, gypsy, and Slavic peoples, if that means anything to you.

Not to mention that one far exceeded the greed of the other, and upset the the balance of Europe much more.

Napoleon captured Vienna and Berlin three times, yet never requested more than they free some of the people subdued to them (Italians in Tyrol, Istria, Poles, etc...). Hitler on the hand sought for his Reich to spread everywhere like a fool.


Will I get a response though? Am I replying to copypasta? Feels like it.

Napoleon couldn't conquer Portugal so I will have to side with Hitler.

Hey gigantic fagget, at least post accurate comparison
Italy, Romania, Hungary...etc were conquered by Germany

Napoleon was literally a cuck.

werent*

Napoleon only defended france from foreigners invasions

>He never even seeked peaceful ways
Pooland education. He was the only one looking for peace since 1935

Hitler is like a little babby compared to Napoleon. He should've let his generals do the military decision making.

Why do you always post this lie?
It won't make it real, you know

Napoleon sent an obscure general to conquer Portugal, which he did in 11 days, forcing the king to flee overseas

>Napoleon ordered Junot to commence the invasion, with the cooperation of three divisions from the Kingdom of Spain.

>Paralyzed by fear and indecision, the Portuguese authorities offered no resistance. Junot occupied Lisbon on 30 November 1807 to find that John and many of the leading families had left for Brazil aboard the Portuguese fleet.

>The French quickly occupied the entire country and appropriated or disbanded the Portuguese army.

It makes it seem like Hitler cared about his common folk more then Napoleon. Like, Hitler killed jews and slavs and what not but it was for the german people, Napoleon didn't give a shit about anyone but himself and the french legacy I guess, I think he said somewhere that he wanted Paris to be the cultural capital of Europe

Hitler actually did make some good military choices other than deciding he could take russia in 6 weeks

That's why the French invaded 3 times Ahmed.

Because the Brits liberated you a year later, retarded moor.
Just because you got liberated by a foreign army a while after your conquest doesnt mean you were never conquered, faggot
Otherwise I guess Hitler never conquered France

I remember there was a river in russia that napoleon was pushed back at that hitler's army crossed.

Maybe, but Napoleon captured Moscow. He had to retreat because the Russians used scorched earth tactics on themselves.

Yeah, at the very least he should've waited another year until the very beginning of summer.

Still, he underestimated the Soviet Union.

Napoleon won 1 battle in Russia and lost all his army while going back to France.

Kek, you guys conquered 3 cities because our king was a cuck.

The peasents fucked your shit up in Porto and that gave a opportunity for the based British to help us.

You should take note of how to treat a much superior invading army next time the Germans invade so you don't have to surrender in 3 weeks.

They used the same scorched earth tactics in WW2. Just in 1812 moving supply and food took much longer, and was much more vulnerable.

You're wrong.
Napoleon's advance was never stopped in Russia
He stopped at Moscow on his own will and left (too late) when food started to lack and winter was approaching

and lost 90% of his army

To winter and starvation
Not to the Russians

The Russians knew taking Napoleon head on in a battle would result in utter defeat, even if the Russians outnumbered him 3:1. I'll give them credit, avoiding the French at every turn and stalling until winter was a smart move.

They didnt plan thay strategy though
They actually tried to fight many times and got their shit pushed in every time, forcing them to retreat further
That's why this dumb faggot is full of shit
There wasnt just one battle during Napoleon's advance, there were dozens, and all resulted in Russian defeat and further retreat until Moscow, where Napoleon decided to stop and wait

This. The legacy of Hitler? The flower of Europe's youth dead, tens of millions of whites dead, the ostracism of right-wing politics, heaps of bullshit hate speech legislation and the effective nail in Europe's coffin. Brilliant.

If Hitler had won...

Its easy to judge the loser of a conflict as the evil destroyer of everything free and good that is the British colonial empire and the French African colonial empire.

Face it Hitler might be the most hated historical figure of all time, but his legacy lives on, despite global propaganda in every class room.

You lost, because you won.

You can kill a man, but you cant kill an idea (no matter how "evil")

>the ostracism of right-wing politics, heaps of bullshit hate speech legislation and the effective nail in Europe's coffin.
That's the legacy of Hitler's enemies, not Hitler.

He probably would have succeeded if the damn Italians didn't delay him for 2 fucking months.

>That's the legacy of Hitler's enemies,
still caused by Hitler

shut up you irrelevant stormfag LARPer

>Countries forced by France into applying the Continental System
Honhonhon

Napoleon was better, Hitler only got to where he was by breaking agreements.

Well by that logic Hitler was caused by the treaty of Versailles, which was caused by Serbian spies, which was caused by Austrian imperialism, which was caused by the Crimean War, and so on and so far back.
Eventually we should just blame everything on the first human to walk upright.

>Hitler only got to where he was by breaking agreements.
you'd know something about that

When did we break the Balfour declaration?

Well Napoleon emancipated the Jews so................

Napoleon, by far. Hitler was an idiot who thought he was a military genius. If he had left the German war machine to his generals, Germany would have won but NOPE! Hitler went full retard and thought he could do it

Especially at Dunkirk. Hitler personally stopped the German advance that would have killed/captured most of the British army - because he thought the British had realized the superiority of the Germany forces (hoping the British would ally with Germany)

Napoleon easily.
It's not hard to steamroll a bunch of small poor ill equipped faggots.

Napoleon was obviously a better commander and probably a better leader in general.

When you jews killed brits left and right so they would leave palestine? Mauled their corpses and booby trapped others. Killed swede cuck Folk Bernadote who saved some jews too.

hitler, napoleon was a (pre-)marxist

We don't know how good he would been in Hitler's position or vice versa given the massive technological changes between them and the resulting changes in military strategy and logistics. Really interesting hypothetical though.

>wikipedia as fact