Poles in the Napoleonic era

It doesnt make them "good guys" being great is very different from being good, Atilla the Hun was great and he built mounds from skulls.

Okay...maybe we have different views about what "great" means...:)

Napoleon's greatest mistake was not utilizing the talents of the the "two Louie's": Davout & Suchet

lol, without Spanish guerrillas, along with the him having to deal with the east, Austria, Russia, Prussia etc.. then your great General Wellington would have had to book the next ship out of Lisbon, and go cower on that silly island of yours until Napoleon finally starved you out.

What was bad about Napoleon anyway? If he had unified Europe, there wouldn't have been any world wars

Of course there would have been...
He didn't even manage to "pacify" the territories he already had...peoples chafed under him and wanted to be free.
It was a defining time in the German national consciousness, that's why we call it "war of liberation".
Sooner or later there would have been uprisings everywhere...but he never even came so far as alliances across Europe showed him the finger!

Do you know where the colors of the German flag stem from?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%BCtzow_Free_Corps

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleonore_Prochaska

And we would have to wear stockings.

I mentioned before that Beethoven didn't like him. I don't know how well the rule applies, but people who speak German and have long scruffy-looking hair tend to be much more agreeable than German speakers with very short hair or no hair at all.


There would also have been no Eurovision 1974 winning entry from ABBA. Go on - admit that you like it.

But ever-so-slightly more seriously, are these things amongst Napoleon's legacy:

The metric system is almost the only system of measurements used in Europe and consequently it is used throughout much of the known world.
Small man syndrome has a famous figurehead.
Napoleon Brandy.
La code de la route - Most of Europe's traffic passes on the right.

That second one is far less reliably associated with Boney as many countries changed sides long after he'd snuffed it.

Hmmm....googles und wikies

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system

I don't think Europe needed a warmongering wanna-be-tyrant Napoleon for the metric system...

"Small man syndrome"...might be! (Berlusconi)

For the "right hand traffic"....this seems to be an urban myth!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_on_the_left_or_right

BACK TO THE TOPIC!
What colours did the formation use on their flag and how did the Poland-Lithuanian Republic of both Nations flag look like?

Using lances was popular but that was not until lances from Austrian army men was captured.
An interessting info for our "Tyske" friend. The German Ulans where do they originate from? (Or was it Uhlans?)

No...they originated in the east as far as I know..
"U(h)lan" is no germanic word either....

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uhlan

feedom of opresing the others as well as their own people ....

Yup...

It is interesting; Napoleon had named War of 1812 as "...my ill fated Polish war". So, that only means he considered situation as if Poles had used him to gain their "independence" from his hands

I will take it farter I say French people are worthless.
Napoleon use Poles to fight his wars and when he did not need them he send them to put rebellion down.
In WW2 they just rolled over and collaborated with Hitler.
After WW2 they try to hold to their colonies with force.
In Vietnam they had to be bail out by U.S.
and who gave them the permanent membership in UN after WW2 as they ware collaborators with Nazi and their war effort was minimal not even tenth as Poland.

If only Prince Poniatowski could swim....

sigh

some of them yes, not all of them, many sided with him.


Was in fact a better soldier and strategist than Napoleon.

here is a bit of Napoleonic grandiloquence.

youtube.com/watch?v=PlvgcQ2Y8M0

Poniatowski didnt drown, he was shot by friendly fire from the french troops while crossing Elster river.

Having said that this one really gets my adrenaline going

Preussens Gloria

youtube.com/watch?v=4pyqOTGQpVY

it comes across real good on keyboard as well

youtube.com/watch?v=4vACuNNYwMU

Which is why he was losing at Waterloo and was only saved by Prussian intervention:)

He was competent but when directly facing Napoleon he was markedly inferior, by the time the prussian 1st core arrived Wellingtons army was completely incapable of anything but defence.

Coming from the biggest twat of a key-board warrior on the whole web!

Change your name login in name you do the man a great disservice by posting drivel under his name.

Yet they won repeatedly. From the Peninsular Wars to the fields of Belgium.

Idiot.


Or just swallow hemlock.

Now, now, now, my son, we don't want Sokrates to get all emotional again, do we?
Confronting Sokidoki with his inner self has that effect, you know that.

Against some of the least capable Napoleons marshalls yes, not against Murat, Ney or Oudinot, the French were typically outnumbered and led by less then competent leaders since the penninsular war was backwater to conflict like 1809 Wagram battle.

When he confronted Napoleon himself he suffered a tactical defeat, lost all his cavalry, had his most precious units bled out and lost all key positions, by the time the 1st prussian core arrived Wellington was reduced to a last stand position.


Awww by the way the irish rifles battalion displayed severe cowardice at Talavera breaking at the very sight of french hussars :))))

Nearly as good as how the Polish navy ran away days before WWII even started!

Right, a "tactical" defeat. Meaning he won.

Nope, Prussians won the battle for him, he lost every possition crucial for offense or defense including La Hay Sainte and lost 50% of his forces, he didnt win anything, he was saved by Bulovs core.

Ompteda, Kielmansegg and Von Kruse for example already had their brigades broken, Wellington won nothing, he was simply losing slow enough that Prussians managed to arrive and save him and even that was not easy with Plancenoit considered.

Jon, you have to remember that Sokrates considers that the 1939 battle of Warsaw was a Polish victory. He's not exactly a good judge of military matters (or anything else for that matter).

Right, so he won.

He was a general, after all.

Nope, Prussians won, we can't even say that he held out since he lost half his army and was in the process of losing the rest.

You compare him to Napoleon who repeatedly defeated enemies twice his number, defeated an enemy occupying the other side of a huge river at Wagram (considered undoable in those times) and you're saying that a guy who outnumbered his enemies, had entire population devoted to him and even then the few major victories he won were particulary bloody and hard fought is equal or superior to Napoleon, thats a joke?

When he faced Napoleon directly he proved to be inferior, without Bulovs troops he was losing and even with Bulovs troops he was unable to capitalise on his victory since he exhausted his army.

You want to compare Wellington to someone, compare him to Poniatowski, both were very good competent and innovative commanders but not Napoleon, Massena or Murat level military geniuses, they even fought the same war of manouvers.