napoleon and britain hated each other

@Ottoman

No they were allied, even though they never helped him.

"Two powers like France and England, with a good understanding between them, might govern the world."

-Napoléon

Who said Napoleon did not compliment Britain?

BTW Ottoman is also wrong because Napoleon did conquered some part of the ottoman empire: Egypt.

@Angry Panda

Do you have a proof that that quote came from Napoleon? The quote could also have been easily misquoted as Napoleon is one of the most misquoted persons in history.

Btw yes Napoleon did conquer Egypte in his campaign, but he didn't fully conquer the Ottoman Empire.

Edited 3/26/2015 12:49:19

@God

France and the Ottoman Empire were allied since the 1500's but after Napoleon started his Egyptian campaign, the Franco-Ottoman alliance ended.

Edited 3/26/2015 12:52:15

BETTER A GLORIOUS DEATH THAN A SHAMEFUL LIFE.

DEATH before DISHONOR!!!

"I don't fear failure. I only fear the slowing up of the engine inside of me which is saying, Keep going, someone must be on top, why not you?"
George S. Patton

A True Warrior fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.

"When you kill a man you're a murderer
Kill many and you're a Conqueror
Kill them all, and you're a GOD."

No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
General George S Patton

May god have mercy on your soul, because I won't.
General George S Patton

"No man, no problem"-Guess who...lol

@ OttomanEmpire

I never said he fully conquered the Ottoman Empire, he did not planned to invade it entirely anyway, it was worthless for him, excepted Ottoman Egypt and Syria which were easily defeated by French forces, the purpose of this invasion was to strenghten French trade interests in the mediterranean sea and most of all weaken the British Indian trade. So yeah you were wrong because you stated "France never conquered the Ottoman Empire", and he did conquered some parts although he never planned to fully conquer it.

About that quote it was during an interview with the British ambassador Lord Withworth, that Napoléon said

"Deux puissances de cette force, en s'entendant bien, pourraient gouverner le monde, si je n'avais pas constamment éprouvé les effets de l'inimitié du gouvernement britannique depuis le traité d'Amiens, poursuivit-il, il n'y aurait rien que je ne fisse pour lui prouver mon désir de vivre en bonne intelligence. J'aurais admis l'Angleterre à participer aux indemnités, aussi bien qu'à l'influence sur le Continent. J'aurais fait avec elle des traités de commerce, en un mot tout ce qui aurait pu la satisfaire et lui témoigner mes dispositions amicales. Mais rien n'a pu vaincre la haine invétérée du gouvernement anglais, et l'on en est arrivé aujourd'hui à décider la grande question de la paix ou de la guerre."

Here Napoleon tried to convince the English government to bring back peace in Europe instead of scuttling it. But nothing could overcome the inveterate hatred of the English government toward him.

Edited 3/26/2015 13:48:33

@Angry Panda

I didn't say that you said that Napoleon fully conquered the Ottoman Empire and im not wrong because Napoleon didn conquer some parts but the Ottoman Empire fully as say'd in that quote. One of the biggest reasons why Napoleon invaded Egypte was to follow the footsteps of Alexander the Great as Napoleon very much admired him, but Napoleon failed to do that after he lost the siege of Acre he was forced to retreat from Egypt afterwards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Acre_%281799%29.

Interesting, thanks for showing me the interview. I always hated how the British try to play Napoleon out as the warmonger even though he never declared war, other then Spain I think.
But I wouldn't really call quote ''Two powers like France and England, with a good understanding between them, might govern the world'' a compliment to England.

Edited 3/26/2015 20:40:36

Napoleon failed to do that after he lost the siege of Acre

I heard of it, but you forgot to mention that the British helped them, you could not win that battle alone.

And you are right about Napoléon, he was an ambitious man and he always wanted to be the guy who could build the biggest empire ever made, as he asserted that if he had:

been able to take Acre [in 1799], I would have put on a turban, I would have made my soldiers wear big Turkish trousers, and I would have exposed them to battle only in case of extreme necessity. I would have made them into a Sacred Battalion--my Immortals. I would have finished the war against the Turks with Arabic, Greek, and Armenian troops. Instead of a battle in Moravia, I would have won a Battle of Issus, I would have made myself emperor of the East, and I would have returned to Paris by way of Constantinople.

@Angry Panda

You replied before I fully finished my reply my fault.
Yeah but the British soldiers didn't really interfere, they only supplied the Ottomans and gave cannon support.

I would recommend this documentary about Napoleons expedition in Egypt and Syria https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCPwFNiPIIM&list=PL2VSheUivlbqF5HENq3ICJP93Q3vR7GuF&index=6

Edited 3/26/2015 20:53:49

Yeah you are right ottoman ^^ just read your edited message, I know that in the "anglo-saxon" world there is a kind of unique view on Napoléon as the bad guy the warmongering one, etc, whereas actually the British were not better.
And yes I think about that Egyptian Campaign that Napoléon did a big mistake (he made 3 big mistakes: conquer Egypt, conquer Russia and sell Louisiana), as you said France and Ottomans were old allies, and he should have kept this alliance, which could have been useful against ennemies such as Austria or Russia.

@Angry Panda

Your right, the continental system was also a big mistake. Why do you think selling Louisiana was a big mistake?

well because at that period (im not talking about the current Louisiana state) Louisiana was 1/3 of what would be the United States of America (from Lousiana to Illinois, most of the midwest), and he did not have a holistic view or comprehensive vision of what would be the future, if he kept Louisiana, the French would have kept still a great influence in America.

And he also sold Lousiana for a dime, really.

Edited 3/26/2015 21:11:18

Consider

Napoleon - Like, tree fiddy wars going on and his army got tired of it 2 years ago.
Rest of the world - Backed out on Napoleon, and Napoleon back out on them
Louisiana - Pretty worthless, just has that good port, other than that a bunch of fur trade.

Pretty good idea imo. It gave him $15 Mil, which equates to $236 Mil today.
In modern times, a good-old assault rifle like the AK-47 (by Kalashnikov) is sold at anywhere from $30-125 in very poor countries.

With basic arithmetic, we find that Napoleon could've bought 1,888,000 AK-47s with that kind of money. Enough to arm his army 2x at least. Considering that, the money got him some much needed provisions.

AK-47s were made in 1946, did you know that?

"A child is born with no state of mind, blind to the ways of mankind"-Grandmaster Flash

oh boy this is turning into another debate

"People often ask me how I feel about my invention being used to kill people every day and the AK being a common weapon of ethnic conflicts. I want to make it clear that I created my assault rifle to protect my country. You can blame politicians for its spreading out of control on a global scale."

Mikhail Kalashnikov

"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us, but pigs treat us as equals."
- Winston Churchill

"It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it."
- Robert. E Lee

"Anything you do, no matter how generous, nice, or selfless it may seem, you ultimately do it for yourself."

- The Martian