Napoleon's Great Blunder: Spain 1808

[Nilgiri]

@Vergennes @Signalian @Desert Fox @Joe Shearer @The Sandman @Vibrio @dexter @vostok

 

[The Sandman]

@Vergennes @Signalian @Desert Fox @Joe Shearer @The Sandman @Vibrio @dexter @vostok

Have already opened and queued it in one of my tabs was gonna watch it tomorrow it's good that you shared it tho. Have watched pretty much all the napoleon vids of this guy quality is best.

 

[Ocelot]

Didn't watch it, but the blunder didn't really lied in invasion but in replacing Ferdinand with Joseph. That move was a critical error which paved the way for the 'Spanish ulcer'.

 

[Nilgiri]

Didn't watch it, but the blunder didn't really lied in invasion but in replacing Ferdinand with Joseph. That move was a critical error which paved the way for the 'Spanish ulcer'.

Yeah and then charging headlong into Russia while this ulcer was still going on sealed the deal.

 

[Ocelot]

Yeah and then charging headlong into Russia while this ulcer was still going on sealed the deal.

Well it's much more complicated then that. Napoleon went into Russia after meticulously studying Russian weather patterns (he took decades into account). He had no intention to march deep in Russia and planned to destroy the Russian army as early as possible. He got his chance at Smolensk but the Russians escaped the trap and forcing him to chase them. Returning from Moscow the winter set in earlier then it usually did, much opposite to the calculations.

Truth is Napoleon was a force of nature. When he remained people's champ, no power on earth could defeat him. When he muddied himself with the same aristocratic crap; assigning his brothers and sisters Kingdoms; divorcing his Josephine for a Hapsburg princess to create a dynasty...he was struck with a bizarre bad luck he couldn't overcome.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well it's much more complicated then that. Napoleon went into Russia after meticulously studying Russian weather patterns (he took decades into account). He had no intention to march deep in Russia and planned to destroy the Russian army as early as possible. He got his chance at Smolensk but the Russians escaped the trap and forcing him to chase them. Returning from Moscow the winter set in earlier then it usually did, much opposite to the calculations.

Truth is Napoleon was a force of nature. When he remained people's champ, no power on earth could defeat him. When he muddied himself with the same aristocratic crap; assigning his brothers and sisters Kingdoms; divorcing his Josephine for a Hapsburg princess to create a dynasty...he was struck with a bizarre bad luck he couldn't overcome.

Somehow, people seem to overlook the misadventure of the Egyptian expedition when analysing Napoleon's career. His military victories there were accompanied by the most ghastly acts of cruelty and by flat betrayal of his colleagues and wholesale lying. Finally, he slipped back to Europe, leaving his army and colleagues abandoned in the Middle East. The hapless Kleber, left holding the baby, was assassinated; all in all, it was a debacle that was a harbinger of the way things were to be.

@Vergennes @Signalian @Desert Fox @Joe Shearer @The Sandman @Vibrio @dexter @vostok

The French dragoons, who dismounted and fought as infantry at Corunna, were reverting to their original role; dragoons were originally mounted infantry, who dismounted and fought after riding their way to battle.

The British, ironically, count the retreat of their army and its evacuation from the port of Corunna among their great military achievements. Centuries later, the self-sacrifice of the French Army allowed them to cast their hasty retreat from Dunkirk as yet another legend. Their historians always fought well.

 

[dexter]

What is quite astonishing is that British miraculously fled the Coruna without any major dissipation and the same will happen again in Dunkirk in WWII. I always find similarities between the blunders did by Napolean and Hitler alike and how the British retreat and naval superiority have saved them countless times and enable them to turn the tide of wars in their favour later on.

 

[Ocelot]

Somehow, people seem to overlook the misadventure of the Egyptian expedition when analysing Napoleon's career. His military victories there were accompanied by the most ghastly acts of cruelty and by flat betrayal of his colleagues and wholesale lying. Finally, he slipped back to Europe, leaving his army and colleagues abandoned in the Middle East. The hapless Kleber, left holding the baby, was assassinated; all in all, it was a debacle that was a harbinger of the way things were to be.

Yes, but by a loss here I meant him being overthrown, not a loss in battle or theater. Napoleon was no angel, but he wasn't evil either, certainly not the 'Corsican ogre' that some of his detractors portray him. I'm rather glad he escaped Egypt, to showcase one of the greatest administrations in history during the consulate years, his real contribution to the world, rather than perishing in the sand with the army.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes, but by a loss here I meant him being overthrown, not a loss in battle or theater. Napoleon was no angel, but he wasn't evil either, certainly not the 'Corsican ogre' that some of his detractors portray him. I'm rather glad he escaped Egypt, to showcase one of the greatest administrations in history during the consulate years, his real contribution to the world, rather than perishing in the sand with the army.

An excellent point!

 

[Pakistani E]

Their historians always fought well.