Deadliest Warrior: Napoleon vs Washington

TacticsIt is common understanding that tactics are one of the most important parts of war. Napoleon excelled at tactics, while Washington was mediocre at best. My opponent claimed that Washington fought most of his battles outnumbered against the British while Napoleon used force and numbers to his advantage in the Napoleonic Wars. In fact, the opposite is true. In most of the battles Napoleon fought, Napoleon was outnumbered but used his superior knowledge of tactics to win the day. Napoleon is often regarded as one of the top five tacticians in history, while Washington is no where near that. Napoleon's tactical skill is exemplified in the Battle of Austerlitz, which is often regarded as his masterpiece. He pulled back from the Pratzen heights, allowing the Austrians and Russians to attack his right flank. After they spent much too many soldiers in the attack, as Napoleon expected, Napoleon took the center of the battlefield. With many of the Austro-Russian troops out of position, he was able to win the day. He was outnumbered almost two to one. Washington, on the other hand, had many lackluster moments of generalship. Americans often regard the Battle of Trenton as Washington's greatest battle, even though it was merely a surprise attack. His bad understanding of tactics is shown by the Battles of Brandywine and Germantown. In both of these battles, Washington refused to pay attention to his flanks, while getting easily outflanked by superior British generals. In both of these battles, the Americans in fact outnumbered the British; as in most of the battles of the war. Clearly, in this battle, Napoleon's tactics would help him beat Washington.WeaponsThe only way to win a war is with weapons. What can anyone do without weapons in a war? The weapons that Napoleon used would be better than Washington's. Napoleon used better weapons than Washington, so it would be easier to win. One of Napoleon's muskets was the Charleville, which had a range of 80 yards and could be reloaded once every twenty seconds. Used by the properly trained French infantrymen, it could be bery effective. Many specialized units of the French Army, such as the Tirallerus and Voltigeurs, could use the Charleville at up to a one hundred fifty yard range. The American counterpart, the Pennsylvanian Long Rifle, was much slower to reload than the Charleville. The Long Rifle only had about a fifteen to twenty yard advantage over the Charleville when used by a regular infantrymen. The specialized American units could not get much more range than the French ones, while being able to reload only 1-2 times a minute. Also, Napoleon's artillery was better. He used artillery which weighed half as much as other countries, such as American artillery. This allowed his army to be more mobile than other armies.TrainingTHis is a no-brainer. Napoleon's troops are more trained than Washington's by far. His troops were trained in six camps at Boulogne, France. They were trained superbly at reloading, accurate firing, and bayonet techniques. The elite core, the Imperial Guard, were a fearsome force in any battle they went to. They contained the best trained and most experienced troops in all of Europe. In all the battles the Imperial Guard participated in, they were only routed in one. They were an unbeatable force that could take on any other army and win.MoraleAlthough the popular opinion suggests that morale was high during the American Revolution for the rebels, it in fact was very low. Many soldiers did in fact desert the cause of the war, and George Washington didn't convince them enough to stay. Napoleon's troops were trained not to break in morale, which they didn't. Did Washington's troop go into to battle shouting "Long Live General Washington?" I think not. Clearly, Napoleon would beat George Washington in any battle.