We all know that WW1 and the Ameritard civil war were both the Napoleonic wars done wrong.
Could Napoleon have won WW1?
>>1219208
>We all know that WW1 [was] the Napoleonic wars done wrong.
no
>>1219245
Napoleon also used horses. Horses were used in Afghanistan. Does it mean that the war in Afghanistan is a Napoleonic war? It does, according to your """logic""".
>>1219208
>>1219245
>poster count
>>1219208
>Ameritard civil war were both the Napoleonic wars done wrong
please elaborate
>>1219329
My thesis is essentially that from a weapons and tactics point of view the Civil War was the last Napoleonic War rather than the first modern war. I point to the similarity in weapons, tactics, and similarities between how battles were fought and wars were conducted. both Union and Confederate leaders were rather inferior to their Napoleonic counterparts, being too addicted to defensive entrenchments and not nearly aggressive enough
>>1219337
I'm pretty sure the weapons of the civil war were a notable leap over Napoleonic ones.
>>1219329
Not OP but
The Civil War has been made into such hyberbole by past and present American historians that is has been difficult to stand back and really take an objective look at it. No doubt these very same people, as evidenced by some of the fags here, will take great offense at what I'm trying to get at here. The Civil War was a poorly fought conflict. The armies were hasily created out of nothing, and as a result could do little more than blaze away at each other. The infantry tended to be held back by an inate tendnecy to fire and dig in, the cavalry was religated to doing next to nothing for the first half of the war, and the artillery was never properly employed. When we look at the conflict subjectively, its diffiuclt not to agree with Von Moltkes' assessment that the Civil War was nothing more than armed mobs roving about the woodlands of North America!
Infantry fire power has been greatly over-rated in this war. The new rifled muskets had potentially greater range, but the troops were rarely encouraged to employ it. Studies of firefights show ranges roughly similar to Napoleanic period with smoothbores! Yet the basic tendency of Americans was to stand and shot, rather than to maneauver and develope the battlefield, even though the French tactical doctrine that they based their training on emphisized battlefield movement. When advantages were gained, there was nothing to exploit success because there was no battlefield cavalry to do so. Even the famed JEB Staurt never used his 10,000 Confederate cavalry to acheive any kind of massed charge on the battlefield which might have provided decisive victory. Instead he was content to ride around the rear of the Union army making petty raids!
>>1219254
No. Napoleonic WARS ARE WON, something the pussyfooted Americans can't seem to do.
>>1219359
One side did indeed win the Civil War.
>>1219345
this is some kind of a copypasta but it is essentially correct
for a conflict that saw advances or widespread applications of innovations in the overarching waging of the war, the industrial/strategic situation and logistics and the like, the situation on the battlefields was strangely backwards
>>1219208
Napoleon couldn't even win the Napoleonic wars.
That's like asking if Caesar could win WW2. He could probably see Tanks and think it was witchcraft, let alone understand modern tactics and weaponry.
>>1219359
I lolt. Have fun with ur sharia and new masters, Eurocuck.
>>1219411
>https://books.google.com/books?id=6Jg1AQAAIAAJ&pg=RA2-PA73&lpg=RA2-PA73&dq=roman+vegetius+tank&source=bl&ots=N_oH6Kj0vM&sig=K8YOh_QeD0Xn3B2creKimpoQUGo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjOhq3s7YPNAhVJRlIKHaL9AIgQ6AEINjAJ#v=onepage&q=%20tank&f=false
Romans knew what tanks were. Vegetius drew up a plan for a "Metal Land Boat"
They also had computers.
>>1219422
>Cuck
>When he's being raped by and worships the neo-conservative elites
Yes sirra my son will go die in Iraq for you after you rape my daughter.
>>1219435
I am the neo-conservative elite, negress.
>>1219446
>Admitting to being a cuck
The Neo-Conservative order has a cock pyramid. Unless your on the top you've swallowed jism.
R/ing the picture of dudes sucking each other's cocks
>>1219208
Napoleon?
In a war against Germany and two full retard allies?
With strong allies on his own?
The question isn't if he can win, the question is how fast he can get to Berlin.
Though, to be fair, Napoleon was a very offensively-minded general. To what degree that'd work in WW1 is questionable, but on the other hand Napoleon was also a general who was known to be able to adapt and could in "un coup d'oeil" assess military situations.
>>1219632
>To what degree that'd work in WWI is questionable
Wasn't the original French plan to be heavily offensive?
>>1219632
France lost its population edge in the XIX century. Germany just had a bigger population and economy. Napoleon would have done nothing special in WW1,mainly because the biggest edge that France had in the Napoleonic wars were the amount of levies that they could raise compared to the traditional kingdoms.
>>1219208
>We all know
Not all of us are complete retards like you, OP.
>>1219435
>a vague plan for a land boat
>being totally fine with a roaring, creaking metal giant that belches fire and death
>computers
>one single find of a toy that predicted eclipses
>>1219740
check out portugal and scotland history
always outnumbered and a lot of times outgunned and yet they manage to achieve many heroic victories throughout the eras
from the battle of aljubarrota to the siege of cochin, from wallace's revolt to the usual perfidious anglo shenanigans against the scots always outnumbered and still able to win a lot of times
That's probably the most retarded thing I've read all day, OP
