>Germans were much better that Romans, because Germans were closer to nature
>hurr durr muh nature le noble savage
The Romans were 'cucks' while conquering the known world, leaving behind poetry and epics, creating architectural marvels, while the Germans ran around with spears in the woods doing their scary ooga booga magic to harness Wotan's power.
kek I prefer the 'cuck' Romans by far.
>More bloodiness does not make it terrible, it just means that brave men sacrificed more gloriously for their country.
War is only glorious when it's fought for actual good reasons and not some retarded 'muh borders' shit like 50% of wars.
>The basis of Europe came from unconnected German tribes
KEK. There's a reason Latin was the language of the educated and well-bred for centuries after the fall of Rome. There's a reason rulers all over Europe called themselves 'Emperor'.
>nearly everything the Romans did, they did by copying others.
Kind of like how the Germans were so proud of their 'close to nature' culture that they desperately imitated the Romans? By the time the Western Empire fell the Germans in the area were effectively Romanized.
>Napoleon was overrated and a surrender monkey like all french. He got beaten by Germans, like Blücher.
Napoleon beat the Prussians and Austrians dozens of times in several separate wars. Any one of those times he could have dismembered their countries and dethroned their monarchs, but he was merciful enough not to. They beat him ONCE and then shipped him off to an island.
>Napoleon was overrated and a surrender monkey like all french. He got beaten by Germans, like Blücher. Napoleon could not hold a candle to generals like Friedrick the Great or Rommel.
>le Rommel
Rommel is a meme general idolized by edgy American Naziboos who don't know what the fuck they're talking about. Even in his own time and military he was outclassed by men like Manstein and Rundstedt.
Please stop posting.