Boney Bashing

Mr Pinchy

Does anybody else find it strange that Napoleon scores so low in the "Greatest Military Leader Of All Time"?

Even Rommel scores higher than him. Rommel was good but he was nowhere near Napoleon in terms of ability or accomplishments. Dont forget Bonaparte influenced Europes political direction for more than a decade while the leaders of most countries were openly hostile to him, or at best reluctantly allied to him.
He consolidated France, ended the political instability, conquered all his enemies, even contemplated invading England. His speed at deploying his armies changed the manner war was waged at the time. He was so feared that in 1814 when the alliance was invading France, they agreed not to initiate an attack if Napoleon was present on the battlefield. Pure class! What other commander had such a reputation?

He made mistakes, but which leader didnt?

Any opinions?

Manach

ahem - Lets invade Russia in a Winter Campaign - ahem.

On a side note, I am looking foward to seeing "Master and Commander", though twas an American Frigate they were trying to sink, and not French.

Mr Pinchy

"ahem - Lets invade Russia in a Winter Campaign - ahem."

I didnt say he was perfect nor that he didnt make mistakes, merely that he should in all fairness rank higher than he scored in the poll.
Take his last battle Waterloo, although he lost, his speed at dividing the forces of Blucher and Wellington, and the overall strategy behind it, were nothing short of brilliant. And Wellington was not so hot either, he was on the defensive the whole time and was only saved by Neys incompetance, and the timely arrival of the Prussians.

He made mistakes like the adventure in Russia, but he did capture Moscow, something even Hitler with his tank divisions didnt manage to do.

PS looking forward to seeing Master and Commander too :-)

Éomer of Rohan

Napoleon did not capture Moscow; his Grande Armee was virtually annihilated at the Battle of Borodino.

shock

And Wellington was not so hot either, he was on the defensive the whole time and was only saved by Neys incompetance, and the timely arrival of the Prussians.

True Wellington was on the defensive for most of the battle but considering how vastly outnumbered he was, the fact that he had fought a battle the previous day and the fact that 2 days before his army had not sxpected to fight a battle it amazing he lasted so long. True if the Prussians hadnt arrived when they did he would have lost. But remember he did very effectively drive the french out of Spain.

Mr Pinchy

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
Napoleon did not capture Moscow; his Grande Armee was virtually annihilated at the Battle of Borodino.

But he did actually take Moscow, just that the Ruskies inconvenienced him by burning most of it. Check out this link, its not bad:

http://www.napoleonguide.com/campaign_russia2.htm?PHPSESSID=de9f93ab233c2b36811690c94d6e13e2

But seriously, does no-one else think he was one of the greatest?

shock

He did mange to drive back the armies of nearly all of europe, conquer most of it, bully the rest and become one of the most well known men of all time with his influence begin felt all over the world. And his feat of rebuilding his army in less than a year was very impressive. But i wouldnt call him the greastest military leader of all time.

spanner

Originally posted by Mr Pinchy
Does anybody else find it strange that Napoleon scores so low in the "Greatest Military Leader Of All Time"?

Even Rommel scores higher than him. Rommel was good but he was nowhere near Napoleon in terms of ability or accomplishments. Dont forget Bonaparte influenced Europes political direction for more than a decade while the leaders of most countries were openly hostile to him, or at best reluctantly allied to him.
He consolidated France, ended the political instability, conquered all his enemies, even contemplated invading England. His speed at deploying his armies changed the manner war was waged at the time. He was so feared that in 1814 when the alliance was invading France, they agreed not to initiate an attack if Napoleon was present on the battlefield. Pure class! What other commander had such a reputation?

He made mistakes, but which leader didnt?

Any opinions?

yea i would agree napleon was one of the best military leaders. and the reason he didnt score to well id say would be that he was never on the modern history course in ireland so people wouldnt always readly know of his achievements

shock

To be honest, its a miracle that the british were able to beat him at all. Even though their infantry were a bunch of conscripts and thieves and murderers, they were the best at the time mainly due to training.

Manach

Offhand, I'd say about a 1/4 of Wellingtons troops were Irish.

Next, indeed, Wellington did call them the "Scum of the Earth", but this
was in the aftermath of a battle when they broke ranks and looted the
Imperal French treasury wagons.

By the standards of the day, the British army was small, but it was organised
in well disciplined regiments. Training was indeed harsh, but achieved an
espirt de Corp only matched by France.
The officer corp, had experience in fighting in the Indian colonies, and
in inovating tactics to handle evolving battlefield situations, as a review
of Wellingtons Indian campaigns would show. Again to quote "They came at us in the old fashion way" (ie columns) " and we beat them again", Wellington judgement of Waterloo.