Hitler vs Napoleon

Don't listen to cucks opinion. Hitler is where it is. He was true man of democracy, choosen by the people for the people. Not some royal who got a right to rule by being born, from the right mother.

Both shit

NAPPY
A
P
P
Y

Hitler's a fucking faggot lmao

His rise to power was probably the most spectacular in history, I'll say that much for him.

And although he was no military genius, he was far from the bungler he's often made out to have been.

But honestly, based on the last sentence of your post, you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about and need to shut the fuck up where Napoleon is concerned.

>Not some royal who got a right to rule by being born, from the right mother.

Jesus christ

just fuck off back to /pol/

>/pol/ in charge of history

Although I admire Hitler, Napoleon is the true patrician's choice.

Napoleon

leave.

How historically inept are you?

>/ourguy/ vs. autistic Austrian painter
wew

Hitler.

Napoleon made the Rothschild Jews rich.

Napoleon anytime.
>His rise to power was probably the most spectacular in history, I'll say that much for him.
How so? Napoleon's rise was a lot more impressive. From a common soldier to a military leader to emperor.

Hitler had zero connections and absolutely nothing going for him other than his will after the end of the First World War, and on a political scale trumped Napoleon's achievements.

Napoleon was a far more impressive individual, but Hitler achieved more with less, at least on a political level.

>b-but he lost!

So did Nappy.

This
Napoopan was in the right place at the right time, while Hitler had to earn everything himself
Both skilled individuals tho

Hitler was more or less planted into the party he wound in charge of, he was then put into power through backroom deals that Hindenburg had his arm twisted to agree to. His rise to power wasn't some organic triumph of will.

Napoleon's legacy is also much more impressive, as his nationalism wound up shaping the future of European politics and his system of law becoming the basis for most European systems of law. He also ushered in the official end of both the Holy Roman Empire and feudalism in Europe. Whereas Hitler managed only to make everything associated with him, his ideals, or his regime political suicide to endorse in Europe.

>napoleon lost

Will we have a great conqueror again?

>Hitler was more or less planted into the party he wound in charge of
>hey faggot """""investigate""""" this party for us
>k

Two months later...

>hey I'm quitting the army faggots
>lol k

You can't be fucking serious.

What did Hitler achieve? Killing the Jews and a bunch of slavs?
Napoleon liberated Europe from feudalism, restored France to stability (with an actual recovery unlike the Nazis who just built theirs on the back of armament spending), consolidated the legacy of the French Revolution while trimming its more excessive portions, emancipated the Jews, and established the Code Napoléon.

Not to mention Napoleon started from nothing too, he went from being an artillery soldier to emperor, Hitler went from being the leader of an insignificant party to dictator. Napoleon's ascent to the top was even more impressive.

>deliberately using dictator instead of 'Leader/Fuehrer'
>having the fucking impudence to imply that Napoleon wasn't a dictator

Gas yourself.

>Napoleon was some royal who got a right to rule from being born to the right mother

>Hitler
>democratically elected

>Napoleon liberated Europe from feudalism
i don't like hitler but this is flat out making shit up

I don't use Germanic meme names
Call Panzers tanks
Call the Wehrmacht the German Army
Call the Luftwaffe the German Air Force
Call the Kriegsmarine the German Navy
Nobody else gets this done for them, the Germans are just special snowflakes who try to get their names used instead of perfectly adequate English equivalents.

>we peaceful krauts dindu nutting!, i-it was all that bad man and his party

t. complete faggot

Stop posting please

At least try giving him a counterargument nerd

Liberté, égalité, fraternité!

VIVE L'EMPEREUR!

russia

Neither came from much
Both were incredibly successful statesmen
Both took supreme power through force
Both were defeated in Russia
Both eventually fell to a coallition with Russia and Britain

But
Napoleon worked up through military merit, not hijacking a populist movement in a period of defitism

Napoleon won his democratic election to Consul via his military success, NOT by literally using gang style political violence to physically put down and bar political opposition

Napoleon promoted some of the most fundamental tenants of the liberal democracy that survive into contemporary history, extending the rights and liberties of the common man. Hitler obviously didn't.

Napoleon was an effective and beloved statesman to his final days winning the loyalty of armies sent to quell him in his comeback. Hitler had conspiracies to kill him and lost all popular support rapildly.

Napoleon's abilities and merit proved his military brilliance. German industrial capability showed through Hitler's success militarily. But was not resultant because of his abilities.

I believe the choice is clear. But since my concentration in Grad School is on various aspects of Roman civilization. Both objectively embody certain aspects of their legscy, but Hitler and the NSDAP remind me more of those Eugenicist ideological Hellenes who failed miserably.

it's not though, he guaranteed the spread of the french revolution which in turn abolished hereditary rights which then removed feudalism

>Napoleon
>royal

Both are disasters

>LARPer
As opposed to the guy who literally cosplayed as Caesar?

napoleon only made 2 mistakes

invading spain and being too aggressive in russia

>(TL's note: Fuehrer means dictator)

THIS

Despite all the bloodshed and devastation that Napoleon's wars and occupation of Europe caused, he left more to the world than Hitler could ever dream of.

Napoleon fought amongst his men; they admired and looked up to him. He was their leader, their father, the man who raised them from nothing into conquering heroes. Hitler served in the Western Front and was by no means a coward, but he never won the kind of wars or battles that Napoleon did.

And even to this day, Napoleon still invokes respect even amongst the nations he fought against, Churchill in particular admired Napoleon and hated any comparisons to Hitler:

>"It seems an insult to the great Emperor and warrior to connect him in any way with a squalid caucus boss and butcher.”
>“I certainly deprecate any comparison between Herr Hitler and Napoleon; I do not wish to insult the dead.”

Hitler gave them world domination.

Hitler

>liberated from feudalism

>no argument at all
Nice try Hans

Have fun with that, literal peasant

>using peasant as an insult

You forgot the serf breaking his back at the age of 30, being conscripted to fight in some war over which king has a bigger dick and then dying of smallpox.

Napoleon becuase he could actually govern and lead in battle.

WTF I love slavery now

>hating on GMOs

Anti-science moron.

Hitler committed suicide due to his failures as a commander principally

Napoleon had to be put on an island and even then he fought his way off and turned Europe upside down basically on his own for half a year and almost got the throne back. So then they put him on an island in the middle of nowhere and forbade ships from visiting him. They couldn't even kill him he was so fucking great.

>Hitler vs Napoleon

Fight night.
The greatest gladiator match in the history of the world: French versus Reich; day versus night; Son of Carlo versus lad of Braunau!

The Russians are coming!
The Russians are coming!

>hating nazi rocketry

anti-science shithead

Napoleon because he was a leftist like me

>true man of democracy
>abolished any semblance of democracy in his country

>Napoleon actually accomplished his goal of emperor
>Hitler just fucked up his military because he was a controlling idiot

...

>history's greatest military mind
>autistic corporal

is this even a choice

How is this a thread? Like that guy early in the thread said, one's a military genius who, despite all the death he caused, changed Europe (really, the world) in dozens of ways, mostly for the better -- vs. an incompetent politician who refused to listen to his generals and murdered millions of people for literally no reason, leaving no positive legacy of his own at all.

Did Napoleon really kill millions though?

Could this post be any more spooked if it tried?

You're being a cheeky little shit, I get it, but in all seriousness, yes, he did.

Although obviously far more were military casualties vs. dudes gunned down for having the misfortune to be born Slavic or whatever.

>leftist
>no sense of nationalism
Yeah because the soviets totaly werent nationalists

they are the same guy

also i am literally the latest reincarnation, screencap this post i'm going to wreck europe's shit again

If you are severally retarded you would chose Hitler. Napoleon is the only choice.

No I'm that guy

Fuck off fraud

>Napoleon actually accomplished his goal of emperor
>Hitler actually accomplished his goal of Fuhrer

Do you idiots even think before you post?

Hitler because at least he's not French.

>From a common soldier
Napoleon was not born a commoner.

Who ruined Europe more you mean?

It's hard to tell.

Great choice of lads, OP.

Together, they form the ultimate leader.
If you stacked one on top of the other they'd probably be the height of an average man too.

Both of them were gamblers

Hitler was above average.

>guy

Haha, those delusional folks are actually trying to roleplay as me. Get it right next time.

Napoleon blows Hitler clean out of the water.

Hell, Angela Merkel blows Hitler clean out of the water.

Napoleon was everything stormfags pretend Hitler was.

You expressed it perfectly.

Hitler was a fraud. Napoleon was the man Hitler tried to be.

trump

You posted it on /pol/ too

This board really is a /pol/ colony...

Nappy by far

>This board really is a /pol/ colony...

no shit sherlock

go back to /leftypol/

No comparisson. Napoleon.

Step aside pretender for I am the true Napoleon man that will ravage Europe once more. I can prove it too by murdering a poor pawnbroker and her sister because idgaf about human life. If Napoleon can kill millions to get what he wants than my act of killing proves I am great and willing to sacrifice any other life for my own glory.

...

>Napoleon
>created Germany and unified Germans
>Hitler
>ruined Germany

napoleon was too for his time
ignore the memes

>legitimate post
>bait posts for /pol/
>not being able to distinguish the two
this board is literally a reddit colony*

But Napoleon wasn't solely responsible for the wars, unlike Hitler, so it's unfair to blame him for all the deaths

So was Napoleon

nice argument, you sure told him

Have most powerful military nation in Europe.
Fail invading southern neighbor
Fail at defeating the only unified country to the east.

Have literally medieval tier logistics was his problem

Boney!

thanks

Napoleon seems like a more competent leader assuming equal forces.