Napoleon Bonaparte was the Greatest.

Awh how come everyones bashing Napoleon on this site?!

I say he's the best period. In every subject and will defend to the death against anyone who says other wise.


He was a great politcian, moral leader, excellent tactition, cunning stratagist, ambitious, workaholic, patient, empathetic and flexible.

He was like Fredrick the Great, Suliman the Magnificient, Louis IVX, Saladin, Marcus Aurelius and Alexander the Great all wrapped up in the mightiest breath of life that has ever clipsed the universe.

And they would have all been inferior to him on every level.
Jan 2008
Chile, Santiago
I pretty much agree with you except that as far as I am concerned Napoleon is inferior to one man: Gaius Julius Caesar, who embodied all the traits you listed just as much as Napoleon, plus a bit more. Not only was Caesar just as good at military matters, better at politics, he was also a literay genius and orator of the first order, as well as an engineer, astronomer and mathematician.

Napoleon for me must take the place of 2nd Greatest Man in all of History.

If it's any consolation though, this opinion would have the backing of Napoleon himself, who was a huge admirer of Caesar and acknowledged him as his equal as a general.
Oct 2008
The Bright Center of the Universe
Napolean destroyed everything the French Revolution worked for. He reintroduced a monarchy and re-established the three estates. Plus what Toltec said. He re-introduced slavery and when the slaves refused he went to war with them. Total ******
Jun 2009
I think the French invasion of Russia in 1812 with something like 550, 000 casualties sort of rules him out of being an excellent tactician and strategist, although that's just my opinion. I know he was brilliant elsewhere but I just think Russia was such a great loss that it can't be ignored. The slavery side of things doesn't help him out in the matter either.
Likes: macon
Hello sir!, so in what was Julius Caeser a better politician!
I know its hard to compare historic relatives but maybe threw discussion we may come to a middle ground?

And yes sir, the Russian Campaign was completely Napoleons decision and his resposiblity.

But to say this marginalize's his tactical and strategic ability is not correct!
In every pitched-battle in the Russian Campaign he won and even accomplished his goal of takeing Moscow.

What he did not forsee was the lack of supplies the Russian steppe and city would have.

If that classifies him in your opinion as a poor tactician and stratagist that thats on you.

But the simple fact is that he was indeed the best stratagist and tactician of the era.

No! Napoleon ended salvery/serfdom in Germany and the other nations he conqured and is critisied for not doing the same in Russia.
Same for France.

He had the choice of anarchy in following the revolution of giveing the people stability etc.
Many people were better off under Napoleon in general.

He was not some crazy git, he was not a dictator cliche but an autocrat.
There was no "Night of the Long Knives" or starving his own people like Franco.

No Holocoust, not Moa Zidong responsible for the death of millions. No gassing of the Kurds.

He went to war some times for his own bidding, some times not.

He was the greatest but he wasnt perfect.
Likes: helloGuys