When was the end for this guy?

>>2285768
>implying he is dead
nice try mozart your not fooling anyone here

Plebian answer: Invading Russia

Pseudo-elitist answer: Attempting to form a long term alliance with Russia in the first place

Patrician answer: It was inevitable after Trafalgar

>>2285768
Through direct military action it was Leipzig, but otherwise it was 1812

>>2285768
he was a cuck and admired Muslims

typical Frenchman, even though he was from Italy

>>2285813
Corsica isn't Italy, you idiot

>>2285816
>

>>2285816
It's a little Italian

>>2285816
That's up for debate friend.

>>2285799
What about attacking Spain in 1808?
Was France really in danger?

>>2285820
>>2285824
>>2285825
Nice samefag

>>2285768
Waterloo

If Napoleon beat the coalition at Waterloo, then they would have probably sued for peace, leaving Napoleon Emperor of the French, which they wouldn't have minded at all on the bases that his brother and nephew took the throne later without much bother. This is also because the members of the coalition were not on easy terms with each other, with many members, e.i the Dutch, the Italian States and the Rhineland-ers having more allegiance towards the French than Anglos or Krauts, and the building tensions between Ruskies and Brits as the up-and-coming powers. Napoleon would have lived comfortably with the promise of no expansion, if his ego would allow it :3

Due to losing the battle, Napoleon was sent to St. Helena, with little to no chance of escape and defeat in his heart. He managed to escape from Alba with the help of Frenchman on the island that he was in part control over, and with English sailors not paying attention. Now the English were keeping their beady Anglo eyes on him so anybody who says that he could have made a comeback are blatantly wrong.

>>2285813
Europeans have been Muslimboos all the way up into the 20th century

>>2285799
Trafalgar wasn't even that significant

It was always known that Britain had full naval supremacy and Trafalgar just confirmed it
However, had Napoleon succeeded in his continental blockade, he would have starved Britain's economy and come out as the winner

>>2285768
when he failed to come to terms with britain, the british might have been willing to leave him if he had stuck within frances original borders and ceased expansion.

but once he determined to overcome britain he was doomed, britain wasnt a opponent he could directly defeat as the RN ensured that invasion was impossible this meant britain could act against him both directly at sea and in amphibious operations and the penisular war, and indirectly via the subsidizing of the sundry coalitions.

it also forced him into hostilities with the other european powers as he tried to enforce the continental system and economically cripple the british.

his skill as a general was enough to prolong the struggle, but it wasnt a contest he could actually win

>>2285842
What do you think Napoleon felt like when he realised that he had lost at Waterloo?

>>2285799
>Patrician answer: It was inevitable after Trafalgar

More like deluded Brit answer
Sure Trafalger meant Britain could keep starting coalitions against him forever, but had he waited for the Russians to attack instead of invading them in 1812, he'd have easily crushed them and the entire continent would've been his

>>2286532
"Better luck next time"