Napoleon v. Washington

C1 - Guerrilla warfare Now, this leaves HUGE problems for napoleon in his invasion. His intellect was high, but he always seemed to stumble when it came to being ambushed. This was a huge problem for the British in the revolution. This type of warfare lets it be so you take few casualties, they take multiple hits, and their supply lines begin to dwindle. More then likely there are not well trained and generally fight larger organized troops. "Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare and refers to conflicts in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or "irregulars") use military tactics, such as ambushes, sabotage, raids, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to harass a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately."[1]Now, before we even consider this significant we must ask a few questions:1) is it effective?2) has napoleon countered it well?The answer to one is yes, it works in most circumstances, and the answer to two is no. Napoleon is terrible at fighting guerrillas. Now, I will explain the answer for #2 in detail as this is a major question in this debate. At first, Napoleon quickly dealt with the insurgence and the British troops in the peninsula war, but by 1812 wellington took the offensive. [2] The Spanish weapon of this new tactic was very new and was their best asset and advantage. When the Spanish used more regular tactics it almost always ended in defeat. "Most organized attempts on the part of regular Spanish forces to take on the French led to their defeat. However, once the battle was lost and the soldiers reverted to their guerrilla roles, they effectively tied down greater numbers of French troops over a wider area with much less expenditure of men, energy, and supplies. Wellington's final success in the Peninsula is often said to be largely due to the collapse and demoralization of the French military structure in Spain caused by the guerrillas" [3]This is important as these guerrillas did very well, and defeated the french. C2 - He would be fighting multiple wars He was emperor from 1804 - 1815. He was a warmonger, he invaded much of Europe in this time. My opponent may claim this helps his side as they where much of the time a success, and this may sound glib to many readers. But it would also be a finagle. He woudl be fighting many fronts, one of them woudl actually have been in Spain. Though Napoleon wasn't always stationed there, he would have to have men stationed in Spain so he would not be defeated there or invaded from the rear. He would also be forced to garrison troops to keep people from rebelling and other countries from invading. Here is this picture of his empire at that time: http://en.wikipedia.org...Dark blue = controlled, lighter blue = politically influenced by. "The subsequent series of wars known collectively as the Napoleonic Wars extended French influence over much of Western Europe and into Poland. At its height in 1812, the French Empire had 130 départements, ruled over 44 million subjects, maintained an extensive military presence in Germany, Italy, Spain, and the Duchy of Warsaw, and could count Prussia and Austria as nominal allies." [4]So he would have to be garrosining all this area, hence many of his resources would not be aimed at america. Though america would be split too, it would be on a smaller scale. C3 - Where the US isThis contention is based on the geographical position of the USA. Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org... There is a huge divide from the two countries. It took columbus 5 weeks to cross the atlantic. [5] The pilgrims took 66 days. [6] Even if we assume he got there in half the time, 33 days, it would take a month to transport anything troops supplies etc. As I said in round one france was invading the US, it would take a month to get there and get reinforcements too. It is also a problem as large amounts of food would have to be stored, and that would waste resources. We must also look at the British navy, they where already at war with france. The british had the largest navy in 1812 with 600 cruisers. [7] In the war of 1812 (we assume it didn't happen, but for a second I am) the britsh fought hard to destroy US french trade. [7] If the UK was at war with france, we can assume british naval vesels would sometimes encounter french ships moving towards the US, and then sometimes sink the ship. So with this in mind not only woudl it take a month to get there, but there's also a possibility the british would sink a few frensh ships. And that was only the "oh look get 'em" scenario, it is likely the UK woulf begin to purposfully block the ships leading to more encunters and less ships able to get to america. As you can see, much of the french northern coast is very close to the UK, so the northern coast would be off limits. And we can also see the southern ports are also very close to the UK as well, so the french would have a tough time getting to the US. So it would be easy for Washington to win. C4 - No one liked france People who hated france:UKFrench royalistsAustriaRussiaPrussiaSpainPortugaul SicilyPapal statesThe Ottoman empireSwedenSardinianetherlandsBrunswickTuscanySwitzerlandHanoverNassauMontegroPersia [8]No one liked france, chances are with france so spread out, being in the US spain etc at the same time many of these countries would take their chances and go for it. The french have troops in the middle of the atlantc, they have troops being attacked by UK ships, being destroyed by gurilla warfare, and he would be being invaded by many countries. He would get his ___ handed to him. CONCLUSIONNapoleon a good strategist? Yes, very much so. But would be be able to fight surprise warfare, many wars, taking month[s] to get across a sea, wasting resources in many wars, and being invaded? No, sorry france you would not win. I, PRO, deserve the vote. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. http://www.historyofwar.org... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org... 4. http://en.wikipedia.org... 5. http://en.wikipedia.org... 6. http://www.pilgrims.org... 7. http://en.wikipedia.org... 8. http://en.wikipedia.org...