Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: Napoleon.png (244KB, 600x320px)
244KB, 600x320px
Pardon me if this is a stupid twofold question, but I never really learned much about the Napoleonic wars other than what I got in high school, which wasn't much.
So, in 1805, the British win at Trafalgar, rather decisively. This puts an end to any plans of Napoleon to invade and occupy Britain, his major adversary who keeps forming coalitions against him.
Napoleon turns his attention further east, absorbs or establishes dominance over a lot of Europe, and eventually attacks Russia, in large part because of how they were skirting his continental embargo with Britain.
Why the hell was that necessary? I mean, by 1812, Napoleon and his allies/protectorates control pretty much all of Europe. I don't have the figures, but I'd be stunned if they didn't have massively more shipbuilding capacity than the British did. Instead of attacking a quasi-ally to force them in line with your economic policy which might or might not actually work to defeat Britain, why not be patient, build up your navy for a couple of years if necessary, get something overwhelmingly powerful, and then just stomp your way to England directly?
I mean, everything I've read/heard about Napoleon indicated he was a sharp guy, so I'm sure he thought of it, and there probably is a good reason why he didn't go that route, but I don't know what it is. Anyone here does?
>>
>>1439408
"Once you pop, you can't stop" -Napoleon Buonaparte
>>
Britain not only had more ships, theyre navy men were worth 100 french navy men. France could not compete without so they attacked russian in some last ditch attempt to starve a global empire.
>>
>>1439408
You can't build a navy just like that and Napoleon could have beaten Russia, the whole unbeatable Russia is a meme, just because both Napoleon and Hitler conquered Europe spendidly and fucked up the Russian invasion.
It doesn't mean that much. In WW1 the Eastern front collapsed and the Western didn't. The Mongols crushed the Russian principalities, Poland and Hungary but were beaten in Bulgaria and never stood a chance against the HRE.
Napoleon made serious mistakes during his invasion, but that doesn't mean he couldn't have pulled it off at all and install a friendlier regime that would have been targeting British India just like Paul intended to before his death and drive Britain even more into the corner by joining the embargo.
He was an ambitious man he never intended to put a limit on how powerful he can become.
>>
You should remember Russia was a major suppler of raw resources for British navy - timber, hemp, tar and other. Redirecting the trade would weaken the British navy and support the French one.
>>
>>1439408
>Napoleon turns his attention further east
No
The war started in 1803 when Britain declared war on France
Napoleon thus gathered an army on the French coast to prepare an invasion of Britain
But in 1805, Britain convinced Russia and the HRE to attack France, and Napoleon thus used the army gathered on the coast to go fight these two new enemies on the East
He soon won decisively at Austerlitz kicking both countries out of the war, but Trafalgar had happened in the meantime, wrecking the French navy
Things were back to the same point as in 1803, except the HRE had been disolved and France occupied Germany
After that, there was peace on the continent (Britain and France were still at war but Brits were too cowardly to engage the French and the French couldnt cross the sea to engage the British) until Britain convinced Prussia to attack France in 1806
Russia joined but both were soon defeated and France ended up controling everything up to Poland
Tl;dr: Napoleon didnt decide to conquer Europe for the lulz because he couldnt get Britain, he went where hostility against France (mostly funded by the militarily powerless Britain) sparked
>>
>>1439421
Also Longbow can pierce French Navy.
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1