This discussion has been closed.
Posted by faran1 (U2570961) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
Good evening erybody
I have been wondering who was better leader hitler or napoleo.
And here is the first sbuject, both them were defeated in russia and almost at the same locasion.
what do you think?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 1.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
Assuming you meant military leader...
Hitler was an atrocious leader of armies. Any operation he touched turned to dust. His notorious meddling in the German armies and messing up of the command structure, especially in the East, had such a negative effect on army morale that his generals plotted against him.
Napoleon, on the other hand, actually knew what he was doing and managed to conquer most of Europe by his own personal leadership on the field.
There's the difference!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Yes I mean military leader.
don't you think that there is equal things bitween them?
Let me inform you that also napoleon didn't listen to his generals and attacked with his own tactic
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Yes I mean military leader.
don't you think that there is equal things bitween them?
Let me inform you that also napoleon didn't listen to his generals and attacked with his own tacticΜύ
faran1: Hitler understood politics. Especially the politics of 1930s Germany. But as a military leader he was a disastor. I am not certain the allies could have won WWII if he hadn't been in command of Germany. There is the story that an officer approached Chruchill with a plan to kill Hitler. Churchill dumped the plan immediatelly, because without Hitler, Germany might get a good leader.
On the other hand, Napoleon is usually listed number 2 on the "All time greatest Generals" list. Alexander the Great being first.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
yes I know about that hitler knew the politics of 1930's but the last word on evry subject was hitler's one.
yes hitler was a disastor but also genious with all his strategy[bltzkrieg].
even you said that napoleon listened to his generals,but I say that there is must be something in commen with both of them
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 3.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
Faran1:
Napoleon was a general. He didn't listen to his subordinate generals and conquered the entire continent. Hitler was a politician, a very shrewd one. But he was a disastrous military leader, a corporal in the First World War who spent his war as a messenger boy - albeit one decorated with two Iron Crosses. Napoleon was educated in military schools, had notable victories over the British and Italians, put down the Paris Mob and took part in a successful coup d'etats, all before he became emperor and proceeded to take over Europe.
Although there are similarities eg both controlled Europe at their zenith, both were turned back by the Russian weather, both were men, you should remember that Hitler conquered Europe through his generals and ruined anything he had a direct part in. Napoleon conquered Europe personally and was able to use his generals as advice, not rely upon them exclusively.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
And I forgot to say one more thing.
If I think about it now it seems that hitler took napoleon's strategy and just fixed it correct me if I'm wrong
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 6.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
Note also that blitzkrieg was not Hitler's strategy, but was a modern derivitive of von Schlieffen's military thinking (based on Cannae 216BC) devised by the German Chiefs of Staff.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
So if napoleon educated in military schools and hitler wasn't so why some people say that hitler was even greater then napoleon?
Note: it's interesting to speak with you
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Do you want to tell that someone elese develop the blitz tactic?
As far as I know hitler develop it if i'm wrong so please tell me who develop it
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Good night to evryone.
you can rply to the messeges and I promis that I will answer each one of them
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 4.
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
Re: Message 4 and 6.
John,
I presume, as I understand it (smile), that your description is a bit similar to my reply in the thread "Timewatch does Hitler...", in any case the gist of the reply (other smile):
"BTW. Our Latin teacher of that year, put Caesar, Napoleon and Hitler on one line, concerning the immense pride about themselves and ruthless in offering lives of citizens for a cause that they all three saw only belonging to themselves...Although for me Hitler was not a strategist as the other two, but perhaps he was the best "demagogue" of the three?"
I agree you and KCL Undergrad in his/her message 6 said it that much better...
Kind regards to both.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 9.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005
I am finding this interesting and stretching too, so thank you Faran!
I have never heard anyone saying Hitler was better than Napoleon, but I can't really see why anyone would. Can anyone, Faran included, advance some reasons why people would think this?
I just think that Napoleon was superior to Hitler in every respect. He, too, was a clever politician, tactically giving titles (such as lord, prince etc) to people who he thought would be useful to keep close or to form alliances.
He also did as well as, maybe better, than Hitler turning France in to one big war machine: an example is that the French use of the right hand side of the road is because he calculated it would get troops to the front quicker!!
The blitzkrieg was not Hitler's brainchild, and all German strategy can be seen as stemming from Cannae rather than Napoleon.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
As a Pole, I can tell you that Hitler is said to be one of these felons who became a taboo in Poland, even in spoken language. His crimes agains humanity (with Poles and Jews in the centre) caused that people who survived WW2(with concentration camp included) and are still alive, don't even think they could put their feet on German land.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 10.
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
Do you want to tell that someone elese develop the blitz tactic?
As far as I know hitler develop it if i'm wrong so please tell me who develop itΜύ
faran1, reply to #10
Heinz Guderian is generally credited as being the βinventorβ of blitzkrieg in his book Achtung Panzer (1937). (With a tip of the hat to Lidell Hart, Fuller and Charles de Gaulle amongst many others). Iβve put inventor in quotation marks as you can go back much further than this as blitzkrieg didnβt just appear from nowhere as a concept, it was developed over a number of years.
Guderian is generally known as the inventor as he crystallised his and others ideas in his book and his model was almost the one used by the Wehrmacht. (I say almost, Guderian wanted a lot more motorised infantry and artillery than the Wehrmacht had throughout the war). He was responsible for the training and tactics of all German motorised and armoured units prior to the invasion of Poland.
To me itβs a pretty good claim. Hitler did enthusiastically support Guderian pre war, however thatβs not the same as Hitler βinventingβ the concept.
Strictly speaking Iβd call Blitzkrieg a tactic (admittedly a large scale one) as part of the strategy. Also note that Guderian didnβt coin the term Blitzkrieg, neither did Hitler. I believe the first time the term appears is in TIME magazine, September 25th 1939, coined by a journalist, then popularised in the UK and USA.
Also note that Hitlers various βStandfast, no retreatβ orders during WW2 are in direct opposition to the concepts of blitzkrieg, which stress manoeuvre. If Hitler did develop Blitzkrieg (I obviously donβt believe this) then why did he ditch his own policy?
Cheers AA.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
AA,
excellent as ever.
I have certainly never heard anyone claim Hitler was a great general - in fact, the opposite is true.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Wellington demonstratively outranks Napoleon.... and all his generals.
In world "rankimngs", there are many who outrank Napoleon...Marlborough for another...Zhukov also.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Wellington never commanded a force bigger than two corps and never fought the Grande Armee at its best. marlborough was a bit player to the great Prinz Eugen (a man largely forgotten in the west). Hitler was a politician, who delegated the work to his subordinates, whereas Nap had to have a finger in every pie, which is why the Allies overwhelmed him in the end. However, if you read a lot of the pro-Nap literature at the moment making excuses for is wars etc., it is always interesting to insert "Hitler" and see if you can advance the aame argument - viz. who declared war on whom?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
rply to messege 15
I belive hitler has froced to change his own tactic because of the war's progress.
but don't froget that hitler changed his mind every minute so that is also reason.
From your explenaion on the blitz tactic you wrote so many names so who exactly think about it for the firdt time?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 19.
Posted by DANNY-FRANKS (U2186615) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
Hitler didn't invent Blitzkrieg but he supported the idea. Guderian and other proponents of Blitzkrieg held almost revolutionary beliefs which German High Command were wary and sceptical of. It was Hitlers support for the daring plan in France 1940 that led to the fall of France and the rest is history.
Napoleon was a better general but Hitler was a better leader in as much he galvanised a nation (albeit through questionable tactics/policies) so that from being the weak man of Europe in the late twenties, became a military super state by late 30s.
DF
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Hi DANNY-FRANKS
Let me to correct you hitler was a disasterous leader.
He never listened to his own generals and also one of the reasons why did he lose the entire war.
May I ask you 2 quesions?
1.why did Hitler lose the battle of kursk?
2.why did Napoleon lose the battle of waterloo?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
He also never lost...... and did not suffer from the drawback of hubris!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Hi
But can you answer this 2 questions?
1.Why did hitler lose the battle of kursk?
2.Why did napoleon lose the battle of waterloo?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 23.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
It would appear that Napoleon lost Waterloo mainly because he was not on top form - he was suffering from cystitis and heamorrhoids, while Wellington was able to ride around and direct every crucial point personally - he spent 14 hours in the saddle!
Napoleon was ill served by his subordinates that day, but also failed to take advantage of crucial points, for example when Wellington's center line was very weak after Orange's disastrous attempt to reinforce La Haie Sainte. He was also misread the situation in sending in the Republican Guard too soon. When the French army saw that not even the Guard could win, the battle was lost.
As for Kursk...I don't know anything about it!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Allow me to give you the reason if i'm not mistaken.
Hitler dealyed the attack and this allowed the soviets to preapre for the german attack.
But I belive there is another reason why did he lose?
I think that he already understood that the whole war in east was lost for him don't you think?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
hitler had strengths and weaknesses, as did napoleon, yet somehow the uses of these strenghs differed, napoleon was a more rational leader of men, which i would say is what makes napoleon a better general, becides, a politician (like hitler) doesn't personnaly lead men like a general, so was hitler even classified as a general? ?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 26.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
No Hitler is not classified as a general, yet for some reason the topic of debate is about them as military leaders!
Having done some frantic reading, it would appear that the delay was a massive mistake on Hitler's part and that he was also unlucky with the reliability of his tanks, although that to me does not seem like a valid reason for losing a battle, there must be more to it than that!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
oops
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Hitler, no matter what anyone has said, was a poor general because of one thing.
He did not heed the lessons of history. Napoleon tried to conquer russia and was beaten by the winter and the stout will of the russian people.
Hitler should have realised he could not conquer russia just by using quality. He would have needed quality and quantity matching that of russia.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
thats like the saying, the blind leading the blind, because their both really as bad as the other, however im sure there was a leader whom napoleon copied in one of his invasions?
Hitler, no matter what anyone has said, was a poor general because of one thing.
He did not heed the lessons of history. Napoleon tried to conquer russia and was beaten by the winter and the stout will of the russian people.
Hitler should have realised he could not conquer russia just by using quality. He would have needed quality and quantity matching that of russia.Μύ
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
I cant agree with you because hitler led his army in full confidence
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 31.
Posted by KCLUndergrad (U2561619) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
HITLER DIDNT LEAD AN ARMY! Im sorry for flaming but we keep coming back to this over and over again. He was a political leader, he never lead men and any time he meddled in military matters it went wrong.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
LET ME INFORM YOU!
hitler did lead his army but wasnt with them at the battle thats all
and i'm sorry too
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
ahh, hitler did have that confidentul lead, yet napoleon was good at other things.
it says in my book, Battle, by R. G. Grant on page 196 "napoleon won almost all of the 50 battles he fought" and of hitler on page 297 "Although early in the war he suported blitzkreig tactics, his personal control over the german war effort was disastrous." so im gonna lie low on this and say, 'do you mean the hitler of 1939, or the 1943 hitler?'
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Good question!
hitler of 1943
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Faran1,
"yes hitler was a disastor but also genious with all his strategy[bltzkrieg]." Blitzkrieg had nothing to do with Hitler, it was the development of military thinking in the 1930's. It was initially developed by a British Tactician, Maj. Gen. JFC Fuller, but was knocked back by the somewhat conservative military thinking in Britain at the time.
Heinz Gudarian was (IMO) the biggest influence on the tactic which would be commonly referred to as blitzkrieg. It had nothing to do with Hitler.
He was a corporal, a politician not a military strategist.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Faran,
"1.Why did hitler lose the battle of kursk?"
Hitler didn't loose the battle, he wasn't in control of the Army.
The German Army 'lost' the battle (Although I'd suggest either side could claim victory) because they were outnumbered, although they inflicted higher casualties on the soviets, the soviets maintained an ability to replace those casualties and material losses, the German Army couldn't. Also, the T-34 played a big part.
".Why did napoleon lose the battle of waterloo" Simply, his army wasn't what it was, he wasn't the man he once was, he was fighting a man who's forte was defence and on his ground of choosing.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
, in reply to message 37.
Posted by (( sean )) Free Nordmann (U2053581) on Thursday, 24th November 2005
...but in a fist fight who would win?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Come on! Hitler was a Bantom!
He'd get floored in the first round!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Hi many
thank you for your answer.
May I ask another question?
lets take a situaion that the french of napoleon in war with nazi geramny of hitler in current year who will win?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
mani,
1. stop picking on him
2. understanding hitler didn't command the battle of kursk, who did?
3. napoleon was less propogated against (yet he was know as the 'corsican ogre' by many europeans after elma in 1813.)
before the battle
".Why did napoleon lose the battle of waterloo" Simply, his army wasn't what it was, he wasn't the man he once was, he was fighting a man who's forte was defence and on his ground of choosing.
Μύ
4.& napoleon was suffering from piles (Ouch!!) and so was not running around barking orders like wellington, And his imperial guard where in the wrong place at the wrong time ( try to win it yourself on: it is tough, and there's a lot of pressure taken off of your shoulders that im sure was on napoleons.)
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
a modern napoleon or an imperial-aged hitler?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
if the first i would say no-one. they would have blown each other up by now. if the second, napoleon, because the tactic hitler adopted, blitzkrieg, would only work if tanks, bombs, machine-guns or heavy-shell-artillery where around.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
...but in a fist fight who would win?Μύ
they where both under average height, and the lil' corporol was shorter. nappy would lose quickly, because hitler was said to have a 'short' temper
...but in a fist fight who would win?Μύ
hmm.... well round 3 is over we have a tie-break!!!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Faran,
It depends on many things. Size of the opposing armies, who has better weaponry, which German General is leading the Army (Which Hitler wouldn't have done) are we talking airforce and Armoury involved, if so, it's unfare to judge as the tactics sued my Napoleon didn't use them. It depends on the composition of the Armies, what they were fighting for, the battlefield, the weather, it depends on many things. The German Army of the 3rd Reich was a different army, of it's time, Napoleon's army was of it's day, and completely different, and because of that, they can't be compared.
You can't compare the two, but suffice to say, Napoleon was a far superior general than Hitler, who was iconic to the German people, he was Head of state, leader, a spiritual leader of sorts, but he was no battlefield general.
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
Hi hallamhal,
1. I'm not?
2. "understanding hitler didn't command the battle of kursk, who did?" Von Manstein off the top of my head...
3. "And his imperial guard where in the wrong place at the wrong time" I wouldn't say that necessarily, I think his problem was his lack of his usual flanking brilliance, a full frontal assault against 'the line' in column was far from good.
You could also argue an under-par Martial Ney had a lot to do with the loss. But those nobbies must have put him off!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
marchal Ney was the hot-headed cavalry leader, right?
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
apparantly some messages weren't properley sent, as the messangers died or even got stuck in mud!
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
also ney needed reinforcements, however napoleon gave them to lobau, who was hard-pressed by the prussians under Marchal Blucher
Link to this forum: who was better leader hitler or napoleon
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.