Mittens The Kitten said:
Napoleon, fantastic war leader, garnered the adoration of his people, built a powerfull empire.
All he did was split up the opposing force into two groups, round around one group then swing over and wipe out the other one. The only way he ever spruced it up was to go after the group on the left first instead of the right.
In fact, his final defeat in the Battle of Waterloo was against a general(who's name escapes me) that noticed Napoleon's tactics and pretty much won because he kept his forces together and they didn't split apart.
Napoleon was just a tiny bit ahead of the times, since before all they did was stand on either side in rows shooting at each other barely even moving. It was bound to change eventually. Others quickly caught and mimic'd his fighting style after his demise.
Also, Napoleon started the Continental System, which prevented anybody from trading with Britain who had the only industry, making everybody
but Britain suffer. When he was nearing victory in the Peninsular War against Portugal and Spain, he went back to France leaving his generals to fight, ending in utter defeat since only Napoleon ever commanded them with the strategies.
When trying to invade Russia in the fall, he kept traveling farther into Russia while the Russians were pulling the scorched earth tactic. When Napoleon made it to Moscow, the Russians just burned it down and refused to surrender. After waiting
five weeks, he decided to leave, but it was too late and winter had come. Napoleon lost ~500,000 troops trying to leave against starvation, the cold and Russian onslaughts.
My choice would be Bismark. Does anybody like him? No. Was he an excellent war fighter? YES.
