The Instigator
1dustpelt
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
xxx200
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Naploleon Bonaparte would defeat George Washington in a war.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
1dustpelt
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,824 times Debate No: 21723
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

1dustpelt

Pro

Round 1 for acceptance.
xxx200

Con

i accept.
Debate Round No. 1
1dustpelt

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting. This is my second debate on this topic.

1. Tactics
Most historians agree that Napoleon was an expert at tactics. This is undeniable. For example, at the Battle of Austerlitz, Napoleon used his many tactics to win the battle. When he faked a retreat and his enemy chased him, he cleverly used his cavalry to charge. He then surrounded his enemy and won.

2. Battles.
Lets look at some of the most important battles Napoleon Bonaparte and George Washington fought.

Napoleon Bonaparte
Austerlitz - Victory and also was outnumbered
Jena - Victory
Waterloo - Defeat, but would have won if his officers cooperated
Logan - Victory and outnumbered
Pyramids - Victory and was outnumbered
Wag ram - Victory

George Washington
Fort Washington - Defeat
Brandying - Outnumbered the British, made poor decisions and lost
Saratoga - Victory
Germantown - Outnumbered the British but lost
Monmouth - Draw
Yorktown - Victory, but only because the French came

As you see, Napoleon is a much better general than George Washington.

3. Troops
Napoleon's men were highly trained, compared to George Washington's inexperienced men.

4. Navy
Napoleon had a large navy. All Washington had were a few frigates and many privateers.

As you see, Napoleon Bonaparte would clearly win if he and Washington fought a war. I look forward to my opponent's arguments.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.onepowerfulword.com...
http://www.historyofwar.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://sc94.ameslab.gov...
http://www.whitehouse.gov...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.pbs.org...

xxx200

Con

my opponent has made some good point. let me answer:

1] battle is not a point that distinguish nepolian from washington because both lost some war and won some war.both made mistake once.

2] navy is not a differentiating factor. both nepolian and washington had nevy. only size of the nevy was different.

3] troops are inexperienced. yes. i agree.

4] tactics:

a] on long island war: washington carefully retreat without damaging his own army and outfoxed british.

b] in the war of new jersy washington "made what may have been the most brilliant move of the entire war. At midnight, December 25, Washington and his troops silently re-crossed the icy Delaware River and surprised a regiment of Hessian mercenaries camped near Trenton." then he attacked new jersy and captured british stronghold.

so you see, washington also had tactics. this is also not the point.

now here i am showing how great washington was:

1] nepolian was an emperor. he was the sole commander of his everything.whereas washington was just the commander of continental army. he was just the servant of congress.

congress was reluctant to fund the war because it wants to settle the matter peacefully. so "Washington would spend the entire war trying to get money, supplies, and troops from the Congress, which at times proved a larger obstacle than the British Army."

in war of new jersy "His troops were tired and dispirited, and his supplies were running low. Worse still, the term of enlistment for most of his soldiers was about to expire."

among all these obstacles george washington fought the war, won the war and brought america back its freedom. nepolean did not have to face any obstacle. he just was a player in an open field where only he won.

so george washington was greater than nepolean.

http://www.sparknotes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
1dustpelt

Pro

Rebuttals

1. Actually, battle is a point. It is true that Napoleon has made mistakes, but he was able to learn from them. He also won much more battles than Washington. The only battles Washington won were purely because of number, while Napoleon won many battles while outnumbered. Again, look at the statistics.

Napoleon Bonaparte
Austerlitz - Victory and also was outnumbered
Jena - Victory
Waterloo - Defeat, but would have won if his officers cooperated
Logan - Victory and outnumbered
Pyramids - Victory and was outnumbered
Wag ram - Victory

George Washington
Fort Washington - Defeat
Brandying - Outnumbered the British, made poor decisions and lost
Saratoga - Victory
Germantown - Outnumbered the British but lost
Monmouth - Draw
Yorktown - Victory, but only because the French came

2. Navy is an inportant factor. It is true they both had a navy, however Napoleon's was much larger and powerful, and would overpower Washington's tiny Navy.

3. Thank you for conceding the troops.

4. It is true that Washington made did indeed make some good tactical decisions, but look at the majority of the battles.
At Brandying, he outnumbered the British, yet failed to learn from his mistakes and lost. Same with Germantown. Most historians would agree that Bonaparte was a better tactition than Washington.

"nepolian was an emperor. he was the sole commander of his everything.whereas washington was just the commander of continental army. he was just the servant of congress."
Ok. That just gives Napoleon more advantages.

"among all these obstacles george washington fought the war, won the war and brought america back its freedom. nepolean did not have to face any obstacle. he just was a player in an open field where only he won."
The only reason Washington won was because of French support. Without the support, the British would have won. Also, what do you mean that "Napoleon did not have to face obstacles"? Napoleon faced many obsticles. He won many battles while facing many enemies.

Sources
Sources are the same sources from last round.
xxx200

Con

1] war certainly is a point. now lets see what point it is.........

napolean won all of his battle with tactics. he lost the battle of waterloo due to poor tactics. since napolean was an emperor and he was the dictator of his army,the credit of winning and losing of battles can be given to him.

but the same is not the situation of washington. washington was not the sole commander of his army. he was a good soldier.he lost his battles due to many reason.let me show you:

battle of fort washington: lost due to disobedience of Colonel Magaw

battle of brandywine: lost due to heavy fog.

battle of germantown: lost due to natural calamity: heavy morning fog

battle of monmouth: draw by washington's tactics

battle of saratoga: won by tactics and help of france.

all the informations about battles are available in wikipedia. you can go and type the name of the battle and you will find.

so you see, first 3 battles are lost due to either non cooperation by his men or natural calamity like heavy fog. and to add insult to injury the congress refuse to fund war. inspite of these hardships the battle of monmouth was draw due to his own tactics and the battle of saratoga, he got french help.

so you cannot say that washington lost the battles because of his poor tactics, there are other reasons of losing the battles.

2] nevy was an important factor for any administrator but irrelevant here since both napolean and washington fought on battle field and not on the high sea.

3] i thank you for accepting napolean's advantage as emperor.

4] "washington won because of french support": that's ok but why french came in the war? it is because of a treaty of alliance between french monarch and second continental congress. so finally the tactics of congress help washington won the battle.that does not reduce washington's image because without the help of the rulers of a country the army of that country cannot win.

you cannot simply compare napolean and washington. if any comparison is possible,then washington is greater than napolean.





Debate Round No. 3
1dustpelt

Pro

Rebuttals

"napoleon won all of his battle with tactics. he lost the battle of Waterloo due to poor tactics. since napoleon was an emperor and he was the dictator of his army,the credit of winning and losing of battles can be given to him."
Napoleon lost the battle of Waterloo because of his officers not cooperating.

"battle of fort Washington: lost due to disobedience of Colonel Magaw"
Okay, I'll give you that one.

"battle of brandying: lost due to heavy fog."
So? The British had heavy fog too. Besides, Napoleon won many battles with fog.

"battle of germantown: lost due to natural calamity: heavy morning fog"
Again, the British had fog too. Napoleon won many battles with fog.

"battle of monmouth: draw by Washington's tactics"
Not because of Washington's tactics, because of number. The British were not only outnumbered, but also some 1,000 soldiers died from heat stroke because of their uniforms. Washington's plan to split the thin British line actually failed.

"battle of sara toga: won by tactics and help of France."
This is irrelevant. Washington was not even involved in this battle. It was Horatio Gates, Benedict Arnold, Benjamin Lincoln, Enoch Poor, Ebenezer Learned and Daniel Morgan that commanded the Americans.

"so you see, first 3 battles are lost due to either non cooperation by his men or natural calamity like heavy fog. and to add insult to injury the congress refuse to fund war. inspite of these hardships the battle of monmouth was draw due to his own tactics and the battle of saratoga, he got french help."
Only one of the battles were because of non-cooperation. As for the natural calamities, both sides were affected. Also, George Washington was not involved at all in Saratoga.

"Nevy was an important factor for any administrator but irrelevant here since both napoleon and washington fought on battle field and not on the high sea."
Navy is very relavent because the topic is, "Napoleon Bonaparte would beat George Washington in a war.", not "Napoleon Bonaparte would beat George Washington in a land battle." Napoleon Bonaparte has the advantage of the Navy, which would be a big factor in him winning the war.

"that's ok but why french came in the war? it is because of a treaty of alliance between french monarch and second continental congress. so finally the tactics of congress help washington won the battle.that does not reduce washington's image because without the help of the rulers of a country the army of that country cannot win."
We were looking at the battle tactics. Not if Washington had support or not.

My opponent argues that Washington has also won battles, and Napoleon has lost battles. This is true, but lets look at the battles Washington won.

Yorktown- The British were outnumbered 3 to 1. Washington also got French support.
Battle of Eutaw Springs- British were outnumbered and the US lost way more men.
Saratoga- Victory
Trenton- Outnumbered the British. There were 2,400 American troops with 18 guns. 1,400 Hessians with 6 light guns.

As you see, the battles Washington did win were because of number, while Napoleon won battles when strictly outnumbered. Napoleon used tactics.

New arguments

Artillery- Historians agree that Napoleon was a master of artillery. Washington barely had any.

Cavalry- Napoleon had many cavalry. Washington barely had any.

Sources
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.britishbattles.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.theamericanrevolution.org...
http://www.wtj.com...
xxx200

Con

"battle of brandying: lost due to heavy fog."
So? The British had heavy fog too. Besides, Napoleon won many battles with fog.

"battle of germantown: lost due to natural calamity: heavy morning fog"
Again, the British had fog too. Napoleon won many battles with fog.

The british have fog but they are on the advantageous side. They are completely covered by fog but still they can see washington’s army. Washington cannot locate british army due to this heavy fog.

battle of monmouth: draw by Washington's tactics"
Not because of Washington's tactics, because of number. The British were not only outnumbered, but also some 1,000 soldiers died from heat stroke because of their uniforms. Washington's plan to split the thin British line actually failed.

Number is not the reason of draw. If you read about this battle from Wikipedia you will see washington’s tactics.

"battle of fort Washington: lost due to disobedience of Colonel Magaw"
Okay, I'll give you that one.

Thank you very much.

So you see Washington lost 3 battles not because of his fault but because of situation and his tactics. With this please add the non cooperation of congress then you will find the true picture.

Napoleon Bonaparte has the advantage of the Navy, which would be a big factor in him winning the war.

Napoleon was an emperor, he may have a navy. Washington was not an emperor. He was an ordinary man. There is no question that he will have a navy. You can say congress do not have a navy.

Beside please don’t call washington’s army. It is the army of continental congress.

It is called continental army. Washington was just a general of that army. He is not paying the army. Congress is.

So you see comparing Washington with napoleon means comparing an emperor with a mere general of an army.

General is a paid professional that leads the army. Emperor is the one who fund the army and pay the general his salary.

Napoleon also has a general like Washington.

It is not a comparison at all.

Debate Round No. 4
1dustpelt

Pro

Rebuttals

"The british have fog but they are on the advantageous side. They are completely covered by fog but still they can see washington’s army. Washington cannot locate british army due to this heavy fog."
I am afraid you are incorrect. Both sides had fog and equal conditions.

"Number is not the reason of draw. If you read about this battle from Wikipedia you will see washington’s tactics."
My opponent brings no proof of his own and wants me to look on Wikipedia. I look, and nowhere did it say that it was a draw because of tactics. This more reputable site, http://www.britishbattles.com... says that they not only outnumber the British and about 1,000 British die of heat stroke.

"So you see Washington lost 3 battles not because of his fault but because of situation and his tactics. With this please add the non cooperation of congress then you will find the true picture."
And I have refuted all of them. If it was Napoleon, he would have easily won the battles.

"Napoleon was an emperor, he may have a navy. Washington was not an emperor. He was an ordinary man. There is no question that he will have a navy. You can say congress do not have a navy."
Exactly, so it gives Napoleon advantage in a war.

"General is a paid professional that leads the army. Emperor is the one who fund the army and pay the general his salary."
My opponent makes the obsurd claim that Napoleon Bonaparte does not fight and only funds the army. Do you know any history? Napoleon was a emperor and a general. He is rated as one of the best generals and tactitions by historians. You don't see Washington being rated like that by historians. Napoleon personally took part in his wars and invasions.

My opponent does not refute the statistics.

Napoleon Bonaparte
Austerlitz - Victory and also was outnumbered
Jena - Victory
Waterloo - Defeat, but would have won if his officers cooperated
Logan - Victory and outnumbered
Pyramids - Victory and was outnumbered
Wag ram - Victory

George Washington
Fort Washington - Defeat
Brandying - Outnumbered the British, made poor decisions and lost
Saratoga - Victory
Germantown - Outnumbered the British but lost
Monmouth - Draw
Yorktown - Victory, but only because the French came

And that the battles George Washington won were puerly because of number, and that Napoleon won many battles while extremely outnumbered.

Yorktown- The British were outnumbered 3 to 1. Washington also got French support.
Battle of Eutaw Springs- British were outnumbered and the US lost way more men.
Trenton- Outnumbered the British. There were 2,400 American troops with 18 guns. 1,400 Hessians with 6 light guns.



Conclusion
Historian rate Napoleon as one of the best generals and tactitions in history. As for Washington, most historians agree he is a mediocre general. My opponent has also conceded that he has advantages like army, navy, and supplies. It is clear Napoleon would win if they fought a war.

Sources
http://www.theamericanrevolution.org...
http://www.wtj.com...;
http://www.whitehouse.gov...;
http://www.britishbattles.com...;
xxx200

Con

xxx200 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
Vive Napoléon! Doesn't look like much of a challenge for Pro; no offense intended, Con, you'll get better, but watch your spelling/grammar.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
1dustpeltxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: hi
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 4 years ago
1Historygenius
1dustpeltxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy Choice.
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
1dustpeltxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and arguments to pro for the forfeit.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
1dustpeltxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Not a votebomb. pro had way more convinving arguments since the con focused on technicalities and regurgetated his own arguments over and over. Pro used more sources, con FF a round, and con went crazy with the bold and yelling in round 4