Napoleon Bonaparte would defeat George Washington in a War #3

By conceding the Spanish campaign my opponent concedes that Napoleon sucked against guerilla tactics. C1. Guerilla War "Washington used guerrilla tactics to weaken the enemy before actually fighting the real battle, in which he usually lost. " My opponent ignores the Southern campaign completely. "If Napoleon could defeat the British, he would defeat Washington. " My opponent obviously knows nothing about the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon lost to the British. Several times, in fact. Look at the final outcome. "Battle of King's Mountain- Washington was not involved. Cowpens- British outnumbered. " Washington was commander in chief of the northern and southern armies therefore, he was involved in the north and the south for all battles. In the entire southern campaign, British loyalists and British regulars outnumbered the revolutionaries. "My opponent claims that Napoleon losing because of the winter in the Russian Campaign is false. Well after Napoleon conquered Moscow, he waited for Czar Alexander I to offer peace. However, the Czar remained silent. With low supplies and his troops lacking winter clothing, Napoleon was forced to retreat. " None of this refutes my point. I simply showed Napoleon losing because of the winter was false. Napoleon lost because of Russian unorthodox tactics. C2. Hate of French "The French had a special drafting system to fill their army. " Why is this relevant? If Washington cannot use soldiers from another country why should Napoleon be able to? C3. Multi-Front war Napoleon is facing his own Foreign and Domestic issues aka the Napoleonic Wars. C4. Win-loss ratio "Saratoga- Washington was not involved. " As commander in chief, Washington was involved. "Valley Forge (Trenton)- Outnumbered the British 1 to 2. They had 18 guns, the British had 6 light guns. " So? All this means is Washington tactically outmaneuvered the British and brought more force than needed. How is this bad? It just means Washington wants to win. "The Egyptians did use unorthodox tactics. " My opponent does not know what an unorthodox tactic is obviously. Unorthodox means something like guerilla war or scorched earth policies. My opponent completely drops my sourced arguments. My opponent, instead relies upon an unverifiable claim made by someone in the comments. I provided a source. My opponent concedes many of my points under my fourth contention. My opponent fails to touch my point that even with French assistance, Washington still had a smaller ill-equipped force when compared to the British and yet, triumphed. Napoleon had a larger well-equipped force and lost. Second, my opponent fails to touch my Bunker Hill analysis. C5. Soldiers My opponent drops the heart of this contention. The Spanish soldiers were less trained than the American fighters and still triumphed. Napoleon's well trained soldiers failed against the Spanish Parisian army utilizing guerilla tactics. The second half of my opponent's argument is unsourced versus my sourced argument. C6. Navy "My opponent drops the argument that the British had their navy blockading many ports during the American revolution. " My opponent never claims this, they simply say the British were blockading Yorktown. Not any other ports. Furthermore, my opponent drops my analysis of the importance of privateers. And that the French would still have to deal with the British. C7. Artillery "My opponent keeps claiming that the only way the Americans fight is with guerilla tactics. " No, I am simply claiming the American fighters utilized guerilla tactics to defeat the British and will do the same to the French. American tactics would be the same as say Spanish tactics. Artillery has no use against hidden enemies. C8. Cavalry Opponent dropped my analysis of how Napoleon's Cavalry lost big time in Spain and Russia. And what about Camden? There was one cavalry charge after they were basically defeated. Then the cavalry was basically used to chase down fleeing revolutionaries. (1) Conclusion: My opponent continues making the same statements over and over again. They completely drop many of my points. Napoleon with all his resources lost. Washington with less resources (even with European assistance) won. Napoleon had a better trained army and yet still lost against forces which were not as well trained as Washington's forces. While a brilliant strategist, Napoleon thought in 2 dimensions. He never imagined that guerilla tactics would be used against him. As such, Napoleon paid dearly with his defeat in Spain which, as Napoleon states "destroyed me. .. All. .. my disasters are bound up in that fatal knot. " (2) Napoleon was destroyed by guerilla tactics. Source: 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://en.wikipedia.org...