The bagpipes were said to summon the evil spirits to the battle field, imagine knowing that and seeing a sea of red heading your way, I'd be running in the opposite direction...
A Waterloo meritavano di vincere i francesi. Napoleone ha commesso errori, ma meno di quanti ne abbia commessi Wellington. Però gli storici inglesi non possono ammettere le pecche delle giubbe rosse. Sono stufo di leggere la Storia scritta da inglesi per il pubblico inglese.
Given the fact that the Scots Greys had never seen action in nearly 20 years before this campaign one wonders quite how the French Staff could possibly have supposed them to the "the noblest cavalry in Europe" while the remnants of the Polish and Red lancers and Chasseurs of the Guard stood only metres away. I know that a bit of creativity is allowed in a movie but really and truly...
@tigerarmyrule "one wonders quite how the French Staff could possibly have supposed them to the "the noblest cavalry in Europe""
A fair point. However, the French may have been thinking about their turnout rather than military skills. The Scots Greys were exceptionally well mounted whereas the French tended to ride whatever nags came to hand.
You can tell the British are so full of themselves. Napolean kicked Europe's ass in countless battles yet these Limeys go on and on about the 1 battle they beat Napolean.
@Nightrbinger24 Fuentes de Onoro, Rolica, Toulose, Albuera e perfino Talavera de la Reina NON sono state vittorie inglesi. La propaganda inglese le ha TRASFORMATE in vittorie.
@manfred898 Thats why it was a coalition. Without Britain's effort in the Peninsular War, Napoleon would have taken over Portugal and the rest of Spain. He would not have been beaten in 1815
Britains efforts along with the Portuguese and Spanish too. Their effort was somewhat greater than you'd see in an episode of Sharpe. The point is, the British, or English really, do have a habit of claiming victories solely as there own, I'd imagine many English don't even realise Waterloo was a multiple effort.
@manfred898 Yes, a greater impact, but it was the British army which drilled the Portugese into a very effective fighting force, and it was Wellington who built massive fortifications to defend Lisbon (Torres Vedras). Some Englishmen have a tendency to claim coalition victories yes, but our impact cannot be overlooked. Prussia seems to get an awful lot of kudos for "saving" Waterloo, when in fact they capitulated to Napoleon in just 2 weeks in 1806 (i think its 1806, maybe 1807)
Adjoining borders makes war a much trickier business don't forget TalonMercenary, but it's true, Britain did play a major role, it's stupid to deny it. It just gets silly when people in our supposedly modern world start waxing about imperial glories, fact is, all of the European nations were as ugly as each other in their greed and ambition at that point, or they should be, to our modern eyes.
The arguemt about how "British" or how "allied" the forces were is redundant. The force was an allied force. Historically the British part has been overplayed ( axxounts written in English are de facto normative ) but was still absolutely central to the victory. Napoleon would have beaten Wellington if Blucher had not arrived....but Blucher did arrive. Davout in Grouchy's place would have been better. All these are essentially unarguable statements for any objective student of the battle.
@tigerarmyrule, I may have exaggerated Ferdinand Foch's role in WW I, admittedly. He was afterall the supreme commander of the Allies in WW I, just as Eisenhower was in WW II, if I recall correctly.
@expertstrategy Yes he was but the personal and political realities differed between 1918 and 1944. bably a better comparison would be Alexander in the Med. Notionally and in fact C-in-C but distant form decision making and dealing with the reality of American precedence post 1943. That said the Foch/Wellington comparison is not totally unhelpful, just as I say a bit stretched.
@StrathendrickPiper, sorry, but history tells us that the 45th French Line Infantry Regiment under Grenier repulsed the 92nd Gordon Highlanders, and the 42nd Black Watch. The only thing that saved the Allied center was the British cavalry charge.
@expertstrategy My friend any objective student of the battle knows that your commentary is on the whole accurate. I think you downplay the British involvement a bit and may I say you do overstate Foch's "overseeing" of Haig and Pershing but on the whole as I say you are arguing from the firm foundation of established reality on Waterloo rather than the wishful thinking employed by others. The fact that English language accounts become globally normative for evident reasons explains a lot.
@tigerarmyrule, I don't intend to try to degrade the British role at Waterloo in any way. I only want to explain the real solid based facts that are always being ignored by ultra-nationalists who try to exaggerate the role of their nation while degrading other people who fought just as hard too. They even go as far as to say that the Waterloo was already won before Blucher arrived, total nonsense. They ignore the fact that Wellington's situation was critical.
@tigerarmyrule, by "They" I refer to British ultra-nationalists. I have great admiration and respect for the British people, but I hate propaganda filled nationalists. I even dislike my own countrymen who greatly exaggerate the role the Americans played in the American Revolutionary War, WW I and WW II. We couldn't have won any of those wars without the help of other nations. I know this for a solid fact.
@tigerarmyrule, I know that there are some French and German individuals who also exaggerate.
Many French historians make excuses for Napoleon's mistakes at Waterloo, and they try to put all of the blame on Grouchy and Ney.
William Siborne was an unbiased historian, and I respect him. He was harshly dismissed by Wellington because the Waterloo model he made involved the Prussian army, and this greatly contradicted Wellington's version on how the battle was won.
@expertstrategy I agree. The simple truth is that the forces ranged against the Armee du Nord were a coalition, an alliance and all were important. Battle breeds propaganda. My own pet hate is the downgrading of the importance of Chasse and others and consequent upgrading the importance of Maitland in stopping and turning the Moyenne Garde. The silver spoon sons of the rich had to get the lions share of the glory.
@tigerarmyrule So the Brits only ever won a battle if they had others helping them ? in the peninsular wars the french had troops from nearly every country in Europe helping them.same in the euro battles............i guess your a frenchie who like to forget such things.Makes you wonder how the Brits got the biggest empire the world has ever known
@eunoway I was referring to Waterloo....not to every battle in history but as a matter of historic fact given you raise the point yes most British victories in large scale continental battles and wars have been as part of coalitions. WW!, WW2, Seven Years War Napoleonic Wars etc are all examples. The Empire was the result of having a large navy at the time when technical advance opened the world to European nation states. Euro states gained empires on a scale with their navies.
@manfred898 That is a blatant lie,we never ever subjugated anybody !! Where ever the Brits went,India Australia,Canada sorry to many to mention here,we went as explorers, and we only stayed in those countries ,because the natives asked us to stay ,this was because we taught them to read and write, and eat properly,and they liked our posh language,and cricket ! fair enough the yanks kicked us out ,but only cos they did not like cricket !!
Oh christ, the state of the British education system today! you weren't teaching the millions who died in the Indian and Irish famines how to eat properly were you? You must be taking the piss, yes? :)
@manfred898 HALLO MANFRED of course i was taking the micky .MY APOLOGIES but when i saw the name MANFRED i assumed you must be german ! and i could not help myself,sorry i know its childish !! But if you are german, you should remember your lot SUBJUGATED england around 466 AD !! YOU ROTTERS !!
I, and I suspect many of the other posters, am having so much fun arguing over meaningless (albeit enjoyable) points as to who did what to whom that we tend to forget that we owe you a big vote of thanks for providing the video in the first place.
What do I mean by 'allied'? I mean an army of which 'British' troops (an awful lot of whom were Irish) comprised barely a third, even when you lump in the KGL. There were troops from smaller German states like Nassau and Brunswick, and those of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, under the Prince of Orange. Then you have the Prussians! One could argue endlessly as to whether Wellington's army would have held out without their intervention, but it was not a British victory!
@ParacleteOfCaborca They wouldn't held out without Prussians. Even without troops, that hold back Prussians (incl. Young Guard and some bat. of Old Guard!) on French side, it was a "near run thing".
@ParacleteOfCaborca all those nationalities were under british command therefore they were part of the british forces. the prussians were the only allies in the battle therefore it is an allied victory. however you shouldn't rule out wellesley because he was afterall a defensive commander plus...he knows the french...from the spanish & portugese campaigns.
@liverpoolmatt87 "all those nationalities were under british command therefore they were part of the british forces"
All of the other foreigners at Waterloo were seperate entities on their own, and it's very stupid to consider them to be part of the British army just because Wellington was in command. Everyone had their own commanders.
In WW I, it's like saying that the Americans and British were part of the French forces because Ferdinand Foch was the supreme allied commander.
@expertstrategy Actually the king's german legions were definitely part of the british army since hanover is the royal house of Great Britain & ireland. yes the nassau's had their own commander (von kruse) but they still were under wellesley's command because he reformed the nassau troops. the brunswickers were assumed command by wellesley from fredrick william duke of brunswick luneberg (house of hanover). it was a coalition force but a british led coalition
@expertstrategy and I never said that they were all part of the british army, I said they part of the british force which of course is a coalition of the low countries were some are connected to the house of hanover. as I said before wellesley was the overall c in c. As for the great war, you should know that a lot of the dominion forces were under british command since they formed up a lot of their divisions and commanded them.
@thebigJM92, Foch commanded the allies on what to do in 1918. Along with the British commander Field Marshal Haig, Foch planned the Grand Offensive, opening on 26 September 1918, which led to the defeat of Germany.
@expertstrategy The British and Americans only listened to Foch when it suited them, obviously this meant co-operation most of the time for mutual benefit. But whereas Wellington was really "primus inter pares" Foch was more a diplomat asking for assistance
@liverpoolmatt87, No matter what anybody says, Waterloo is an Allied victory, and it's far from being a "British victory" since the British only make up between 16-20% of the Allied army including the Prussians. The Nassauers, Hanovarians, Brunswickers, Dutch, and Belgians wern't part of the British army at all, with the exception of the KGL. They all had their own sovereignty, and they fought for their own countries and not for Britain.
@expertstrategy I didn't say they were fighting for britain at all, yes I know they had their own sovereignty but they had strong ties with britain as well seeing that they were all related to the british monarchy in various ways. And more than once did britian used german troops from various german states to assist but again commanded by the british...namely during the seven years war and the american revolution.
Where were the British at Austerlitz and Leipzig? You're showing a real depth of knowledge here, old chap. The reason we weren't at Verdun is that we were at the Somme, and we weren't in Indo-China because we aren't total idiots.
Napoleon did not call himself Emperor of France, but the Emperor of the French people. This is really a big difference. The Englishman sent him to St. Helena and poisoned him in the hope that these words: Freehet, Equality and Brotherhood would disappear forever, but they live today.
The Old Guard, consisting of Poles was to end with Napoleon. At the Battle of Waterloo refused them give up and vold death iced llet of slavery. French Republic and later Napoleon had to defend themselves at all times by reactionary monarchs in Europe. France flag is a symbol of freehet (blue), equality (white color) and fraternity (red color).
People. Please. What does it matter who did what? The Britts fought with the Prussians and the Belgians/Dutch against Napoleon and won, whats the big deal?
Noone ever says ''Mmm yes but without Philadelphia the revolutionary war wouldve been lost'' when talking about the American Revolution, even if some of the states are almost as big as a whole european country.
Some of them were on the edge of breaking and had been saved by their cavalry. Others could give such a resistance due to the short rest after repulse of Ney's charges by Uxbridge's forces, that was impossible without Tripp and Gigny. Even Middle Guard's grenadiers charge could have a killing result for Wellington's center without Chasse's countercharge... So, despite main role of Brits and Germans, without Dutch-Belgians it would be lost battle for Allies.
@genWathier That is unfair, everyone knows the Belgians are the toughest bastards in the world! They held of the entire German Army for 3 weeks (or something) with 2000 soldiers so the French could mount a resistance during WWI.
No, we didn't ! The biggest part of the German army went against the French and the BEF. The Belgian shot their rounds as fast as possible because they were allowed to retreat to new positions when they had no bullets left. They only faced a few divisions. There is no shame in that. They were dressed as baker boys, some had rifles and some even had bullets, and the others could only piss in the direction of the Germans.
The only problem the country I live in had in the two wars it saw as a country, is that we were always prepared for the previous one. In '14 the were ready to fight Napoleon, in May '40 Belgium was ready for the Kaiser. With nowadays army reformations I hope our army boys never get confronted with some nasty rabbits...the rabbits might win :D
And in Waterloo they fought on both sides because there was no thing known as 'Belgium'. There were just some men who were soldiers and joined an army to make a living. Some reports talk about Belgian cowards; others about heroes. But in my opinion, if the French had a bone to pick with the English, no idiot from our lands should be in either army, because you never get any credit from either the British or the French.
Some more words. I wrote about main role, but we should remember, that without Dutch-Belgium troops battle 100% would be lost. Don't forget, without countercharges of Allied cavalry, squares would be broken.
3. I hope, nobody would doubt, without Prussian's arrival at Napoleon right flank, Wellington would never hold his positions against the whole Napoleon's armee (with Young Guard, part of Old Guard and so on).
So, we see main role of Brits and Germans at Waterloo. Really Allied victory.
wouldn't played so decisive role, if Armee du Nord hadn't been so exhausted with Wellitgton's resistance. This resistance was the main key to the victory. This succesfull resistance would be impossible without British tactic and British and trained by Brits Allied troops. British defence was the best during Napoleonic wars. Fact. But at Waterloo, with such a number of British soldiers, Wellington was unable to hold back Napoleon's army.
(correction) the Prussians under Bulow arrived halfway during the battle and secured Wellington's flank. The Prussians pretty much diverted vital French troops and relieved Wellington of unbearable pressure. Everybody had their role in defeating Napoleon at Waterloo. To say the Brits did the most is wrong and propagandic. There were far more foreign squares than there were British squares when they were charged by Ney. The Prussians deserve the credit for saving Wellington's ungrateful arse.
Wellington was obviously sour over the fact that he was rescued by his Prussian allies at Waterloo, when he bitterly dismissed the unbiased model of Waterloo by William Siborne because it involved 40,000 Prussians.
At least there are some Brits in the 19th century who are humble with facts and they don't rely upon exaggerated propaganda.
@BritishJanner, the myth breaking content in my channel are pure facts whether you like it or not. I'm sure you find it pretty suprising that Sir Francis Drake was in fact dubbed a knight by a Frenchman and not by Elizabeth I herself. It's just propaganda the Brits made up during the Victorian Age.
Do I have to mention the many successful invasions of England after 1066, most of which were done by the French?
@expertstrategy "I'm sure you find it pretty suprising that Sir Francis Drake was in fact dubbed a knight by a Frenchman and not by Elizabeth I "
Not really. Elizabeth awarded Drake the knighthood but got a Frenchman to perform the actual ceremony because Good Queen Bess was being her usual crafty self and wanted tacit approval from the French government of Drake's actions. But even if she had the village idiot dub him with a lavatory brush, Drake would have still been a knight.
can someone please me help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos! what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
@familyguy6668 The countries of England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Although Napoleon only really wanted to take over England.
@mrharmonica100 It is not so simple as it seems at the first glance. Yes, perhaps, half of Wellington's soldiers were Germans by origin (and the whole Prussian army, of course), but these Germans were equiped and trained by Brits, Hannoverians were at British service. Commanders-in-chief were British also...
@genWathier are u honestly stating that this was a British victory? If so--(as u brits would say it) you are MAD. wellington was perhaps in command, but a general is nothing without his troops. and as u urself stated, many were prussian. and u must not forget all the other allies who were there too. u see brits made up only a third of "wellingtons" army. thus it is safe to say, this is not a british victory. but an allied victory. and since blucher saved the day, prussia mostly won.
@mrharmonica100 it seems you haven't read my comment?! I wrote, Brits in Wellington's army couldn't stand against Armee du Nord without their Allies and Prussian army. The same - Germans couldn't! I didn't tell about all Allies, because the discussion was about Germans and British soldiers...
@mrharmonica100 Concerning Napoleon, I think, he was the best general in Europe - it would be senseless to discus this theme. Every commander has his "age". To the moment of start of this battle his "age" was over. But it doesn't overshadow his career, that proves - he was the best military leader in 19th century.
@mrharmonica100 Prussia just finished of Napoleons inevitable defeat. They did the least amount of the fighting at Waterloo and thus cannot be credited with the victory. The most credit goes to the British, who held Hougomont, stood firm against the French artilary and cavalry onslaught, Picton's heroic counter-offensive and slaughtering Napoleons imperial guard.
@BritishJanner, the Prussians under arrived halfway during the battle and secured Wellington's flank. The Prussians pretty much diverted vital French troops and relieved Wellington of unbearable pressure. Everybody had their role in defeating Napoleon at Waterloo. To say the Brits did the most is wrong and propagandic. There were far more foreign squares than there were British squares when they were charged by Ney. The Prussians deserve the credit for saving Wellington's ungrateful arse.
@BritishJanner, it was the Dutch and Chasse that repelled the Middle Guard Grenadiers of Louis Friant when Halkett's brigade, Brunswickers, Nassauers, and Hanovarians were routed. He pretty much saved the Allied center or otherwise, the Middle Guard Grenadiers would have flanked the British Foot Guards while they were busy exchanging fire with the Guard Chasseurs of the 3rd and 4th.
At Plancenoit, the Prussians fought against most of the Imperial Guard under Lobau and some battalions of the Old Guard, while the British/Allies fought only a fraction of it, and they barely survived the attack of the Middle Guard.
Had Napoleon committed the full strength of the Guard, the center would have been obliterated very easily.
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
@mrharmonica100 Germans couldn't stand against Napoleon without British tactic (as we saw it at Ligny), Brits couldn't stand against Napoleon with such a number of soldiers as they had (without German and Dutch-Belgium Allies). So, victory was impossible without Allies for all sides - both British and their Allies..
@genWathier i agree, yet in some part disagree. But u are forgeting many other minor nations in there too. i will refrain from listing them. and Napoleon was top man for twenty yrs. he was older and fatter and sickly during the battle. he himself stated that after this campaign he would stop his soldiering. not to mention he caused many headaches to the leaders of the Coalition for a long time as well and none could beat him. in fact, only a russian winter could stop him.
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
@mrharmonica100 Idiot. The French had us? lol Actually, the French were being slaughtered left right and centre and Napoleon failed to break the British infantry squares with his artillary and heavy cavalry, he also failed to take Hougomont and general Picton's heroic counter offensive stalled the French advance. Napoleon had no more resrves left even before the krauts arrived. The British did all the hard work at Waterloo, the krauts didn't arrive to the very end of the battle.
@BritishJanner false. britian only made up 1/3 of "wellingtons" army. so this is an allied victory. read previous comments they have fact instead of ur poor propaganda that ur country feeds u. and french troops were not being slaughtered. they took the farm house, i forget its name, and pushed up. just like napoleon ordered. it was the prussians who came in a stopped his advance then french troops were afraid and broke. thus giving the house back to the allies.
@EddieExile "It was Wellington's allied army that caused the french imperial guard to break and flee." yes, that's true, but the Prussians fought the entire Young Guard Division at Plancenoit and some battalions of the Old Guard for a long time.
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
@mrharmonica100 Who's talking about "propaganda", you fool. Stick to your own shit history and keep your snout out of ours, or better still, go stuff your fat face with a hamburger.
@BritishJanner haha u are! and there is only world history not my history and ur history. and it also seems u have proved my point wen all u could say about my facts was just immature name calling hahaha PS y would i need a hamburger?
@BritishJanner can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
If Napoleon supported d'Erlon's infantry with some more brigades of cuirassiers, the breakthrough for Greys would be impossible... Later Napoleon told, he needed such a commander as Murat.
My Grandfather charged German tanks in BEF stupid, brave but bloody hell could you see the hoodie wearing hardman chave, neds and neets matching them today.
it amazes me in so many videos,,,,arguments about british army or special forces.french german wars,,zulu.american war of independence,falklands ,,boer,,afghanistan twice,,,,,ireland,,,libya..roman lol...the point is,we were there for you to argue about,the british are like a good schoolboy when it comes to conflict.100 percent attendance,lol
The Prussians pretty much saved Wellington from being overwhelmed by diverting vital French troops and crushing the French right flank, by taking over Plancenoit (the amount of casualties there even dwarfed that of hougomont) and they also drove out the Young Guard and some battalions of the Old Guard after brutal fighting. The entire Young Guard Division lost 80% of it's strength. Plancenoit acted as a leech to the French, by draining vital troops, and relieving Wellington of pressure.
@expertstrategy can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
The Battle of Waterloo is mainly Wellington's but also Blucher's victory.
The British saved Blucher from certain defeat by agreeing to stand against the French at Waterloo, without which Napoleon would have used his entire army to crush the Prussians.
It's stupid for the Brits to take most of the credit. Their allies have made many significant, important contributions during the battle of Waterloo. I've already explained them to you time and time again.
Look an alliance of the british and the Prussians won. The British didn't win and would have lost without Blucher. The Prussions didn't and would have lost without Wellington. The alliance won. Any other reading is mere nationalist nonsense.
Wellington totally outsmarted Napoleon by choosing his battlefield at waterloo and agreeing with Blucher that Wellington would hold until Blucher arrived.
Napoleon arrogantly and stupidly claimed he didn't need Grouchy's forces to beat Wellington.
The French imperial guard broke and fled during their last attack on the British centre.
Wellington and Blucher defeated Napoleon exactly as planned.
"The Prussians are the only reason why victory was won"
How dare you, sir. You've shamed yourself, you've disgraced yourself, you will answer.
What about the British infantry squares? Hougomont? General Picton? Huh? You, sir, are a deluded little f***wit! And a disgrace to the heroic gallant 1st Duke of Wellington. Get your arse off this video. The Empire will strike back.
@BritishJanner, there were non-British squares too just so you know, and at Hougomount, the British Coldstream guards were accompanied by the Germans and Dutch. From 12:15-1:15, there were 1500 Germans in comparison to only 400 CG.
You really need to re-educate yourself for your own sake.
"Get your arse off this video. The Empire will strike back."
The British empire is dead. LOL. THe United States is still alive, and more powerful than any country in the world.
@BritishJanner "How dare you, sir. You've shamed yourself, you've disgraced yourself, you will answer."
Damn well put. I would suggest that you go round and give the young shaver a first class rogering, but I suspect that he only attended the most minor of public schools and that there is little hope that he would learn from the experience.
@BritishJanner Wellington, Bloucher, Napoleon, they all knew if it was not for the prussian support the British lines would have broken and Napoleon would have most certainly won, historian after historian, strategist after strategist has said this, Prussia won Waterloo, If the British were not there than Napoleon wouldn't have lost, but Prussia stopped Napoleon with British support.
@Chuggers456 Yes of course, because the British would have used the same tactics if the Prussians hadn't been there, y'know the fact they had a large Germanian army supporting them didn't change British tactics at all... o.O Are you a complete idiot or are you just pretending? There is NO way you could have known the outcome if the Prussian weren't there, and what does it matter anyway, are you sore that France lost or something? Poor show ol' chap, poor show!
@Chuggers456 Another ignorant imbecile. Again, the Prussians didn't arrive to the very end of the battle, most of the fighting had already occured and the battle was as good as over when Blucher arrived. The British were the ones who won Waterloo. We were there the whole day and the steadfast resilience of the British infantry squares which Napoleons artillary and cavalry failed to break won the day. We did most of the fighting and it's only right that we take most of the credit.
@BritishJanner, you're forgetting that the Hanovarians, Nassauers, Brunswickers, Dutch, and Belgians all fought just as hard as the British. Chasse saved the Allied center with his counterattack when Halkett's brigade, Hanovarian, and Nassauers all failed to repell Louis Friant's Middle Guard Grenadiers.
There were many Allied squares that repelled the French cavalry charge. The Prussians arrived halfway and and secured the left flank. The main army saved Wellington from defeat.
@expertstrategy You don't know what you're talking about, boy. The squares were mainly British with only a few Brunswickers. Naopoleon had run out of troops, Wellington had outfoxed him. The Prussians just finished off Napoleons inevitable defeat.
@BritishJanner, The Nassauers, the Brunswickers and the Netherland infantry, all were formed in squares. The remaining Allied cavalry made up of Tripp's brigade, Grant's brigade, Dornberg's brigade and the remaining effectives of the Household Brigade.
The Black Brunswickers greatly distinguished themselves against Ney's French cavalry. You see, there were many non-British and squares non-British cavalry as well.
@BritishJanner, did it really take you this long to respond to me, and that's all you've got to say? That's just totally pathetic. The least you can do is research a little.
@BritishJanner The Prussians didn't arrive till the end of battle, okay we get that, but Napoleon still could have won, If you didn't notice The Prussians distracted Napoleons Forces and scared them, if Prussia had not arrived, it would have ended differently!
@Chuggers456 I don't think many British people claim the credit all for themselves. After all Britain built up and fought alongside the Portuguese, Dutch and Spanish armies and effectively funded the Prussians, Austrians and Russians in order to get them to join coalitions against Napoleon. Without the Prussians at Waterloo there would almost certainly have been a bloody draw, and Napoleon would probably have pulled back with a force large enough to cause months more trouble if not years
@Chuggers456 But Napoleon would not have won a decisive victory and would not have reached Brussels or driven the British and Prussians out of Belgium (which was the only way he could have won even a temporary reprieve for France from a crushing coalition blow)
@thebigJM92 That may have been true, but you must remember, Grouchy could have reinforced the Main Army after Waterloo, and drove the British and Prussians out, but we will never know.
@Chuggers456 True, but only if the Prussians had completely routed. Napoleon would probably have left him to fend off any potential threat from that direction
@thebigJM92 Well he would most likely split Grouchy's forces, well actually I think he would have Grouchy imprisoned for his arrogance, he had the chance to reinforce the french lines, but instead headed off in the wrong direction.
@Chuggers456, Grouchy was persistent to fight the Prussians. It had nothing to do with arrogance at all. He was ordered to chase the Prussians shortly after the Battle of Ligny, and that is what he was doing. He fought the Prussians at Wavre, and when the Battle of Waterloo was over, he maintained his 30,000 troops, and defeated several Prussian attempts to destroy it. He inflicted a serious check on the Prussians at Namur.
@Chuggers456 Are you a psychic? You cannot say it would have ended differently. Napoleons troops were being slaughtered left, right and centre and he had no more reserves left. He was in no position to win the battle even before the krauts arrived.
@BritishJanner, oh, and btw, i forgot to mention that there were 36 Allied squares at Mont-Saint-Jean. 20 of which are Germans, 4 are Dutch/Belgians, and 12 are British. Brits only make up 1/3 of the Allied squares. You're argument that the Brits make up the majority of the squares is utterly destroyed. LOL
I suggest you stop spewing out your nationalistic propaganda bull crap before I continue to ridicule you even more.
@expertstrategy The only thing you've "pwned" is your boyfriends ass, stupid American. Your "myth breaking" is a load of bollocks and your channel reeks of garlic and frogs legs.
Waterloo was a British victory, Commanded by the gallant 1st Duke of Wellington. Deal with it. Faggot.
Darn...it was just gettin' good when it stopped...
MnktoDave 3 hours ago
The bagpipes were said to summon the evil spirits to the battle field, imagine knowing that and seeing a sea of red heading your way, I'd be running in the opposite direction...
soulofthenorth 1 day ago
What a fail.. that charge was commenced much too soon in the battle.
samthegreat4 2 days ago
biggest empire in the world BIGGEST HEARTS
englandareus 5 days ago
@englandareus
Oh lord.
manfred898 6 hours ago
this could help on my research paper for school
mickkmouse 6 days ago
the British are the best
easy77146 1 week ago 2
@easy77146 sad
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhgfdse 6 days ago
@easy77146
As someone who holds a British passport, believe me, they're not ;)
manfred898 6 hours ago
@easy77146 you fought along side the dutch my friend don't forget that!
jorrit1192 2 hours ago
A Waterloo meritavano di vincere i francesi. Napoleone ha commesso errori, ma meno di quanti ne abbia commessi Wellington. Però gli storici inglesi non possono ammettere le pecche delle giubbe rosse. Sono stufo di leggere la Storia scritta da inglesi per il pubblico inglese.
Notteriva 1 week ago 2
Given the fact that the Scots Greys had never seen action in nearly 20 years before this campaign one wonders quite how the French Staff could possibly have supposed them to the "the noblest cavalry in Europe" while the remnants of the Polish and Red lancers and Chasseurs of the Guard stood only metres away. I know that a bit of creativity is allowed in a movie but really and truly...
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tigerarmyrule "one wonders quite how the French Staff could possibly have supposed them to the "the noblest cavalry in Europe""
A fair point. However, the French may have been thinking about their turnout rather than military skills. The Scots Greys were exceptionally well mounted whereas the French tended to ride whatever nags came to hand.
oarfrost 1 week ago
You can tell the British are so full of themselves. Napolean kicked Europe's ass in countless battles yet these Limeys go on and on about the 1 battle they beat Napolean.
dachicagoan 1 week ago
@dachicagoan
The British had been fighting Napoleon WAY before Waterloo.
Look up the Penisular Wars.
Nightrbinger24 1 week ago
@Nightrbinger24 Fuentes de Onoro, Rolica, Toulose, Albuera e perfino Talavera de la Reina NON sono state vittorie inglesi. La propaganda inglese le ha TRASFORMATE in vittorie.
Notteriva 1 week ago 2
@Notteriva I'm sorry I don't speak French(?)
Nightrbinger24 1 week ago
@Nightrbinger24 It's Italian!
Notteriva 1 week ago
@Notteriva You can use google traductor.
Notteriva 1 week ago
@Notteriva My apologies.
I was never good with the 'romantic languages' (French, Italian, Spanish, etc). I'm sorry.
I got something about English propaganda and something about some battles not being English victories.
Nightrbinger24 1 week ago
@dachicagoan 1 battle? Oh dear. You have absolutely no clue. Go and look at something MAJOR known as the "Peninsula War 1808 - 1814". Idiot
TalonMercenary 1 week ago 3
@TalonMercenary Well said.
ggarlick46 6 days ago
@TalonMercenary
Whilst the Russians were destroying the 'Grande Armee' ;)
manfred898 6 hours ago
@manfred898 Thats why it was a coalition. Without Britain's effort in the Peninsular War, Napoleon would have taken over Portugal and the rest of Spain. He would not have been beaten in 1815
TalonMercenary 6 hours ago
@TalonMercenary
Britains efforts along with the Portuguese and Spanish too. Their effort was somewhat greater than you'd see in an episode of Sharpe. The point is, the British, or English really, do have a habit of claiming victories solely as there own, I'd imagine many English don't even realise Waterloo was a multiple effort.
manfred898 6 hours ago
@manfred898 Yes, a greater impact, but it was the British army which drilled the Portugese into a very effective fighting force, and it was Wellington who built massive fortifications to defend Lisbon (Torres Vedras). Some Englishmen have a tendency to claim coalition victories yes, but our impact cannot be overlooked. Prussia seems to get an awful lot of kudos for "saving" Waterloo, when in fact they capitulated to Napoleon in just 2 weeks in 1806 (i think its 1806, maybe 1807)
TalonMercenary 6 hours ago
@TalonMercenary
Adjoining borders makes war a much trickier business don't forget TalonMercenary, but it's true, Britain did play a major role, it's stupid to deny it. It just gets silly when people in our supposedly modern world start waxing about imperial glories, fact is, all of the European nations were as ugly as each other in their greed and ambition at that point, or they should be, to our modern eyes.
manfred898 3 hours ago
@manfred898 I agree 100%, but humans will be humans i suppose. Sometimes, ignorance really can be bliss
TalonMercenary 3 hours ago
@TalonMercenary
Spot on :)
manfred898 3 hours ago
@TalonMercenary
And the Englishmen should bear in mind the very high percentage of Irishmen in that army too ;)
manfred898 3 hours ago
Got to admit the Scottish got some balls going into battle with bagpipes against rifles
to07mmy1 1 week ago
1:00 epic arty miss lol
MrRickios 1 week ago
BRITISH HEAVY CAVALRY vs THE ROHIRRIM
AALO101 1 week ago
I LIKE SPAGHETTI.
AALO101 1 week ago
The arguemt about how "British" or how "allied" the forces were is redundant. The force was an allied force. Historically the British part has been overplayed ( axxounts written in English are de facto normative ) but was still absolutely central to the victory. Napoleon would have beaten Wellington if Blucher had not arrived....but Blucher did arrive. Davout in Grouchy's place would have been better. All these are essentially unarguable statements for any objective student of the battle.
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
@tigerarmyrule, I may have exaggerated Ferdinand Foch's role in WW I, admittedly. He was afterall the supreme commander of the Allies in WW I, just as Eisenhower was in WW II, if I recall correctly.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy Yes he was but the personal and political realities differed between 1918 and 1944. bably a better comparison would be Alexander in the Med. Notionally and in fact C-in-C but distant form decision making and dealing with the reality of American precedence post 1943. That said the Foch/Wellington comparison is not totally unhelpful, just as I say a bit stretched.
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
4:53 lol
thenewone61 1 week ago
Forth Eorlingaaaas!!!!!
Wait, wrong cavalry charge....
xDangerouslyAwkwardx 1 week ago
French cavalry is better then british cavalry
Notteriva 1 week ago
those amazons kicked his french ass back to paris, good job 92nd
StrathendrickPiper 1 week ago
@StrathendrickPiper, sorry, but history tells us that the 45th French Line Infantry Regiment under Grenier repulsed the 92nd Gordon Highlanders, and the 42nd Black Watch. The only thing that saved the Allied center was the British cavalry charge.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy team effort, your correct, the scots greys cavalry charge was devastating, they captured Napoleons Eagle that day
StrathendrickPiper 1 week ago
@StrathendrickPiper, The French managed to capture four or six British flags at Waterloo during that day despite losing two eagles.
expertstrategy 1 week ago 2
@expertstrategy My friend any objective student of the battle knows that your commentary is on the whole accurate. I think you downplay the British involvement a bit and may I say you do overstate Foch's "overseeing" of Haig and Pershing but on the whole as I say you are arguing from the firm foundation of established reality on Waterloo rather than the wishful thinking employed by others. The fact that English language accounts become globally normative for evident reasons explains a lot.
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
@tigerarmyrule, I don't intend to try to degrade the British role at Waterloo in any way. I only want to explain the real solid based facts that are always being ignored by ultra-nationalists who try to exaggerate the role of their nation while degrading other people who fought just as hard too. They even go as far as to say that the Waterloo was already won before Blucher arrived, total nonsense. They ignore the fact that Wellington's situation was critical.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@tigerarmyrule, by "They" I refer to British ultra-nationalists. I have great admiration and respect for the British people, but I hate propaganda filled nationalists. I even dislike my own countrymen who greatly exaggerate the role the Americans played in the American Revolutionary War, WW I and WW II. We couldn't have won any of those wars without the help of other nations. I know this for a solid fact.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@tigerarmyrule, I know that there are some French and German individuals who also exaggerate.
Many French historians make excuses for Napoleon's mistakes at Waterloo, and they try to put all of the blame on Grouchy and Ney.
William Siborne was an unbiased historian, and I respect him. He was harshly dismissed by Wellington because the Waterloo model he made involved the Prussian army, and this greatly contradicted Wellington's version on how the battle was won.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy I agree. The simple truth is that the forces ranged against the Armee du Nord were a coalition, an alliance and all were important. Battle breeds propaganda. My own pet hate is the downgrading of the importance of Chasse and others and consequent upgrading the importance of Maitland in stopping and turning the Moyenne Garde. The silver spoon sons of the rich had to get the lions share of the glory.
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
@tigerarmyrule So the Brits only ever won a battle if they had others helping them ? in the peninsular wars the french had troops from nearly every country in Europe helping them.same in the euro battles............i guess your a frenchie who like to forget such things.Makes you wonder how the Brits got the biggest empire the world has ever known
eunoway 1 week ago
@eunoway I was referring to Waterloo....not to every battle in history but as a matter of historic fact given you raise the point yes most British victories in large scale continental battles and wars have been as part of coalitions. WW!, WW2, Seven Years War Napoleonic Wars etc are all examples. The Empire was the result of having a large navy at the time when technical advance opened the world to European nation states. Euro states gained empires on a scale with their navies.
tigerarmyrule 1 week ago
@eunoway
By subjugating peoples, yes, and you're proud of this?
manfred898 6 hours ago
@manfred898 That is a blatant lie,we never ever subjugated anybody !! Where ever the Brits went,India Australia,Canada sorry to many to mention here,we went as explorers, and we only stayed in those countries ,because the natives asked us to stay ,this was because we taught them to read and write, and eat properly,and they liked our posh language,and cricket ! fair enough the yanks kicked us out ,but only cos they did not like cricket !!
eunoway 5 hours ago
@eunoway
Oh christ, the state of the British education system today! you weren't teaching the millions who died in the Indian and Irish famines how to eat properly were you? You must be taking the piss, yes? :)
manfred898 3 hours ago
@manfred898 HALLO MANFRED of course i was taking the micky .MY APOLOGIES but when i saw the name MANFRED i assumed you must be german ! and i could not help myself,sorry i know its childish !! But if you are german, you should remember your lot SUBJUGATED england around 466 AD !! YOU ROTTERS !!
eunoway 3 hours ago
@eunoway
But you asked the Germans to stay because they're better at football, no? ;)
manfred898 2 hours ago
nice try napoleon
mrmemanme 1 week ago
Picton looks a bit Tarantino.
Hussarer 1 week ago
Probably the most EPIC battle EVER fought next to the thousands of Roman Empire battles.
aceflyer89 1 week ago
Vive La Emperor!
Viz12345 1 week ago
if only didn't get 1/3 of his soldiers out he could have owned wellington if he had 30,000 more
joshua12345a 2 weeks ago
@joshua12345a Yeh but the Prussians wanted to kill him more than we did ,for the chaos his army had caused to the Prussian folk.
seangrie8 1 week ago
Many thanks for the upload Zappiss.
I, and I suspect many of the other posters, am having so much fun arguing over meaningless (albeit enjoyable) points as to who did what to whom that we tend to forget that we owe you a big vote of thanks for providing the video in the first place.
oarfrost 2 weeks ago
@StrangerYouKnow (and anyone else interested)
Alessandro Barbero's 'The Battle' is arguably the best account of Waterloo in print, completely without national bias.
ParacleteOfCaborca 2 weeks ago
@ParacleteOfCaborca I have that book too, and I have a book on napoleon and wellesley
liverpoolmatt87 2 weeks ago
@StrangerYouKnow
What do I mean by 'allied'? I mean an army of which 'British' troops (an awful lot of whom were Irish) comprised barely a third, even when you lump in the KGL. There were troops from smaller German states like Nassau and Brunswick, and those of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, under the Prince of Orange. Then you have the Prussians! One could argue endlessly as to whether Wellington's army would have held out without their intervention, but it was not a British victory!
ParacleteOfCaborca 2 weeks ago
@ParacleteOfCaborca They wouldn't held out without Prussians. Even without troops, that hold back Prussians (incl. Young Guard and some bat. of Old Guard!) on French side, it was a "near run thing".
genWathier 2 weeks ago
@ParacleteOfCaborca all those nationalities were under british command therefore they were part of the british forces. the prussians were the only allies in the battle therefore it is an allied victory. however you shouldn't rule out wellesley because he was afterall a defensive commander plus...he knows the french...from the spanish & portugese campaigns.
liverpoolmatt87 2 weeks ago
@liverpoolmatt87 "all those nationalities were under british command therefore they were part of the british forces"
All of the other foreigners at Waterloo were seperate entities on their own, and it's very stupid to consider them to be part of the British army just because Wellington was in command. Everyone had their own commanders.
In WW I, it's like saying that the Americans and British were part of the French forces because Ferdinand Foch was the supreme allied commander.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy Actually the king's german legions were definitely part of the british army since hanover is the royal house of Great Britain & ireland. yes the nassau's had their own commander (von kruse) but they still were under wellesley's command because he reformed the nassau troops. the brunswickers were assumed command by wellesley from fredrick william duke of brunswick luneberg (house of hanover). it was a coalition force but a british led coalition
liverpoolmatt87 1 week ago
@expertstrategy and I never said that they were all part of the british army, I said they part of the british force which of course is a coalition of the low countries were some are connected to the house of hanover. as I said before wellesley was the overall c in c. As for the great war, you should know that a lot of the dominion forces were under british command since they formed up a lot of their divisions and commanded them.
liverpoolmatt87 1 week ago
@expertstrategy The difference is that, by in large, Wellington told the other commanders what to do- wheread Foch didn't.
thebigJM92 1 week ago
@thebigJM92, Foch commanded the allies on what to do in 1918. Along with the British commander Field Marshal Haig, Foch planned the Grand Offensive, opening on 26 September 1918, which led to the defeat of Germany.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy The British and Americans only listened to Foch when it suited them, obviously this meant co-operation most of the time for mutual benefit. But whereas Wellington was really "primus inter pares" Foch was more a diplomat asking for assistance
thebigJM92 1 week ago
@liverpoolmatt87, No matter what anybody says, Waterloo is an Allied victory, and it's far from being a "British victory" since the British only make up between 16-20% of the Allied army including the Prussians. The Nassauers, Hanovarians, Brunswickers, Dutch, and Belgians wern't part of the British army at all, with the exception of the KGL. They all had their own sovereignty, and they fought for their own countries and not for Britain.
expertstrategy 1 week ago
@expertstrategy I didn't say they were fighting for britain at all, yes I know they had their own sovereignty but they had strong ties with britain as well seeing that they were all related to the british monarchy in various ways. And more than once did britian used german troops from various german states to assist but again commanded by the british...namely during the seven years war and the american revolution.
liverpoolmatt87 1 week ago
@expertstrategy nor did I say it was a british victory.....of course it was an allied victory.
liverpoolmatt87 1 week ago
@boss180888
Where were the British at Austerlitz and Leipzig? You're showing a real depth of knowledge here, old chap. The reason we weren't at Verdun is that we were at the Somme, and we weren't in Indo-China because we aren't total idiots.
ParacleteOfCaborca 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner
Waterloo was an allied victory.
ParacleteOfCaborca 2 weeks ago
@ParacleteOfCaborca What do you mean "allied"?
StrangerYouKnow 2 weeks ago
Hollywood said so, hence it's true. Duh.
HelmutVillam 2 weeks ago
FACT: Napoleon let the British win because he felt sorry for them.
Fuliginosus 2 weeks ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Napoleon did not call himself Emperor of France, but the Emperor of the French people. This is really a big difference. The Englishman sent him to St. Helena and poisoned him in the hope that these words: Freehet, Equality and Brotherhood would disappear forever, but they live today.
Odysses100 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
Odysses100 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Old Guard, consisting of Poles was to end with Napoleon. At the Battle of Waterloo refused them give up and vold death iced llet of slavery. French Republic and later Napoleon had to defend themselves at all times by reactionary monarchs in Europe. France flag is a symbol of freehet (blue), equality (white color) and fraternity (red color).
Odysses100 2 weeks ago
People. Please. What does it matter who did what? The Britts fought with the Prussians and the Belgians/Dutch against Napoleon and won, whats the big deal?
Noone ever says ''Mmm yes but without Philadelphia the revolutionary war wouldve been lost'' when talking about the American Revolution, even if some of the states are almost as big as a whole european country.
Musikkingofthecookie 2 weeks ago
Some of them were on the edge of breaking and had been saved by their cavalry. Others could give such a resistance due to the short rest after repulse of Ney's charges by Uxbridge's forces, that was impossible without Tripp and Gigny. Even Middle Guard's grenadiers charge could have a killing result for Wellington's center without Chasse's countercharge... So, despite main role of Brits and Germans, without Dutch-Belgians it would be lost battle for Allies.
Could anybody retort?
genWathier 2 weeks ago
@genWathier That is unfair, everyone knows the Belgians are the toughest bastards in the world! They held of the entire German Army for 3 weeks (or something) with 2000 soldiers so the French could mount a resistance during WWI.
Musikkingofthecookie 2 weeks ago
@Musikkingofthecookie
No, we didn't ! The biggest part of the German army went against the French and the BEF. The Belgian shot their rounds as fast as possible because they were allowed to retreat to new positions when they had no bullets left. They only faced a few divisions. There is no shame in that. They were dressed as baker boys, some had rifles and some even had bullets, and the others could only piss in the direction of the Germans.
NKismynextgoal 2 weeks ago
@NKismynextgoal Haha, sorry my bad, i meant WWII, but my I had something stuck in it. Nontheless the Belgians are tough bastards :D
Musikkingofthecookie 2 weeks ago
@Musikkingofthecookie
Tough bastards, maybe :-)
The only problem the country I live in had in the two wars it saw as a country, is that we were always prepared for the previous one. In '14 the were ready to fight Napoleon, in May '40 Belgium was ready for the Kaiser. With nowadays army reformations I hope our army boys never get confronted with some nasty rabbits...the rabbits might win :D
NKismynextgoal 2 weeks ago
@Musikkingofthecookie
And in Waterloo they fought on both sides because there was no thing known as 'Belgium'. There were just some men who were soldiers and joined an army to make a living. Some reports talk about Belgian cowards; others about heroes. But in my opinion, if the French had a bone to pick with the English, no idiot from our lands should be in either army, because you never get any credit from either the British or the French.
NKismynextgoal 2 weeks ago
Some more words. I wrote about main role, but we should remember, that without Dutch-Belgium troops battle 100% would be lost. Don't forget, without countercharges of Allied cavalry, squares would be broken.
genWathier 2 weeks ago
3. I hope, nobody would doubt, without Prussian's arrival at Napoleon right flank, Wellington would never hold his positions against the whole Napoleon's armee (with Young Guard, part of Old Guard and so on).
So, we see main role of Brits and Germans at Waterloo. Really Allied victory.
Is anybody, who disagree?!
genWathier 2 weeks ago
wouldn't played so decisive role, if Armee du Nord hadn't been so exhausted with Wellitgton's resistance. This resistance was the main key to the victory. This succesfull resistance would be impossible without British tactic and British and trained by Brits Allied troops. British defence was the best during Napoleonic wars. Fact. But at Waterloo, with such a number of British soldiers, Wellington was unable to hold back Napoleon's army.
genWathier 2 weeks ago
Everything seems so clear, that it seems, there is nothing to quarrel about...
If we speak about main role in the battle - it was mainly British-German victory.
1. Wellington had too less British soldiers to win the battle alone. Who can tell something against it?
2. Though German soldiers had a majority in Wellington's-Bluchers forces, Blucher's arrive
genWathier 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(correction) the Prussians under Bulow arrived halfway during the battle and secured Wellington's flank. The Prussians pretty much diverted vital French troops and relieved Wellington of unbearable pressure. Everybody had their role in defeating Napoleon at Waterloo. To say the Brits did the most is wrong and propagandic. There were far more foreign squares than there were British squares when they were charged by Ney. The Prussians deserve the credit for saving Wellington's ungrateful arse.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
Wellington was obviously sour over the fact that he was rescued by his Prussian allies at Waterloo, when he bitterly dismissed the unbiased model of Waterloo by William Siborne because it involved 40,000 Prussians.
At least there are some Brits in the 19th century who are humble with facts and they don't rely upon exaggerated propaganda.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
@expertstrategy Yeah but your "myth breaking" is still a load of bollocks.
BritishJanner 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, the myth breaking content in my channel are pure facts whether you like it or not. I'm sure you find it pretty suprising that Sir Francis Drake was in fact dubbed a knight by a Frenchman and not by Elizabeth I herself. It's just propaganda the Brits made up during the Victorian Age.
Do I have to mention the many successful invasions of England after 1066, most of which were done by the French?
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expertstrategy "I'm sure you find it pretty suprising that Sir Francis Drake was in fact dubbed a knight by a Frenchman and not by Elizabeth I "
Not really. Elizabeth awarded Drake the knighthood but got a Frenchman to perform the actual ceremony because Good Queen Bess was being her usual crafty self and wanted tacit approval from the French government of Drake's actions. But even if she had the village idiot dub him with a lavatory brush, Drake would have still been a knight.
oarfrost 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expertstrategy "Do I have to mention the many successful invasions of England after 1066, most of which were done by the French?"
Yes please. I'd be fascinated to hear the cheese eating surrender monkey's version of history.
dizzykaren 2 weeks ago
can someone please me help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos! what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
@familyguy6668 The countries of England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Although Napoleon only really wanted to take over England.
Eddtastic100 2 weeks ago
@expertstrategy Thank you :) at last someone knows it wasn't just the British at Waterloo
mrharmonica100 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner Actually it's a prussian victory. The French had u. It was Blucher who saved the day. Look it up
mrharmonica100 3 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 It is not so simple as it seems at the first glance. Yes, perhaps, half of Wellington's soldiers were Germans by origin (and the whole Prussian army, of course), but these Germans were equiped and trained by Brits, Hannoverians were at British service. Commanders-in-chief were British also...
genWathier 3 weeks ago
@genWathier are u honestly stating that this was a British victory? If so--(as u brits would say it) you are MAD. wellington was perhaps in command, but a general is nothing without his troops. and as u urself stated, many were prussian. and u must not forget all the other allies who were there too. u see brits made up only a third of "wellingtons" army. thus it is safe to say, this is not a british victory. but an allied victory. and since blucher saved the day, prussia mostly won.
mrharmonica100 3 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 it seems you haven't read my comment?! I wrote, Brits in Wellington's army couldn't stand against Armee du Nord without their Allies and Prussian army. The same - Germans couldn't! I didn't tell about all Allies, because the discussion was about Germans and British soldiers...
genWathier 2 weeks ago in playlist Napoleanic History & Reenactment
@mrharmonica100 Concerning Napoleon, I think, he was the best general in Europe - it would be senseless to discus this theme. Every commander has his "age". To the moment of start of this battle his "age" was over. But it doesn't overshadow his career, that proves - he was the best military leader in 19th century.
genWathier 2 weeks ago in playlist Napoleanic History & Reenactment
@genWathier i agree.
mrharmonica100 2 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 Prussia just finished of Napoleons inevitable defeat. They did the least amount of the fighting at Waterloo and thus cannot be credited with the victory. The most credit goes to the British, who held Hougomont, stood firm against the French artilary and cavalry onslaught, Picton's heroic counter-offensive and slaughtering Napoleons imperial guard.
BritishJanner 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, the Prussians under arrived halfway during the battle and secured Wellington's flank. The Prussians pretty much diverted vital French troops and relieved Wellington of unbearable pressure. Everybody had their role in defeating Napoleon at Waterloo. To say the Brits did the most is wrong and propagandic. There were far more foreign squares than there were British squares when they were charged by Ney. The Prussians deserve the credit for saving Wellington's ungrateful arse.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, it was the Dutch and Chasse that repelled the Middle Guard Grenadiers of Louis Friant when Halkett's brigade, Brunswickers, Nassauers, and Hanovarians were routed. He pretty much saved the Allied center or otherwise, the Middle Guard Grenadiers would have flanked the British Foot Guards while they were busy exchanging fire with the Guard Chasseurs of the 3rd and 4th.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
At Plancenoit, the Prussians fought against most of the Imperial Guard under Lobau and some battalions of the Old Guard, while the British/Allies fought only a fraction of it, and they barely survived the attack of the Middle Guard.
Had Napoleon committed the full strength of the Guard, the center would have been obliterated very easily.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 Germans couldn't stand against Napoleon without British tactic (as we saw it at Ligny), Brits couldn't stand against Napoleon with such a number of soldiers as they had (without German and Dutch-Belgium Allies). So, victory was impossible without Allies for all sides - both British and their Allies..
genWathier 3 weeks ago
@genWathier i agree, yet in some part disagree. But u are forgeting many other minor nations in there too. i will refrain from listing them. and Napoleon was top man for twenty yrs. he was older and fatter and sickly during the battle. he himself stated that after this campaign he would stop his soldiering. not to mention he caused many headaches to the leaders of the Coalition for a long time as well and none could beat him. in fact, only a russian winter could stop him.
mrharmonica100 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 Idiot. The French had us? lol Actually, the French were being slaughtered left right and centre and Napoleon failed to break the British infantry squares with his artillary and heavy cavalry, he also failed to take Hougomont and general Picton's heroic counter offensive stalled the French advance. Napoleon had no more resrves left even before the krauts arrived. The British did all the hard work at Waterloo, the krauts didn't arrive to the very end of the battle.
BritishJanner 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner false. britian only made up 1/3 of "wellingtons" army. so this is an allied victory. read previous comments they have fact instead of ur poor propaganda that ur country feeds u. and french troops were not being slaughtered. they took the farm house, i forget its name, and pushed up. just like napoleon ordered. it was the prussians who came in a stopped his advance then french troops were afraid and broke. thus giving the house back to the allies.
mrharmonica100 2 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100
La Haye Sainte fell after the heroic King’s German Legion ran out of ammunition
This exposed Wellington’s centre which Napoleon attacked with his imperial guard.
This attack was defeated on the eastern side by British, Brunswick and Nassau, and Dutch troops, and on the western side by British troops.
It was Wellington's allied army that caused the french imperial guard to break and flee.
EddieExile 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EddieExile "It was Wellington's allied army that caused the french imperial guard to break and flee." yes, that's true, but the Prussians fought the entire Young Guard Division at Plancenoit and some battalions of the Old Guard for a long time.
expertstrategy 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrharmonica100 can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
@mrharmonica100 Who's talking about "propaganda", you fool. Stick to your own shit history and keep your snout out of ours, or better still, go stuff your fat face with a hamburger.
BritishJanner 2 weeks ago
@BritishJanner haha u are! and there is only world history not my history and ur history. and it also seems u have proved my point wen all u could say about my facts was just immature name calling hahaha PS y would i need a hamburger?
mrharmonica100 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BritishJanner can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
If Napoleon supported d'Erlon's infantry with some more brigades of cuirassiers, the breakthrough for Greys would be impossible... Later Napoleon told, he needed such a commander as Murat.
genWathier 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Fire At WILL!"
Everyone: "Which one is Will?"
TheMrSouron 3 weeks ago
roast beef flee flee
TheJEANFB 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
TheJEANFB 3 weeks ago
My Grandfather charged German tanks in BEF stupid, brave but bloody hell could you see the hoodie wearing hardman chave, neds and neets matching them today.
AeroNY28 3 weeks ago
:)
ABLH456 3 weeks ago
i just like cavalry charges and history :)
callumsgame 3 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
it amazes me in so many videos,,,,arguments about british army or special forces.french german wars,,zulu.american war of independence,falklands ,,boer,,afghanistan twice,,,,,ireland,,,libya..roman lol...the point is,we were there for you to argue about,the british are like a good schoolboy when it comes to conflict.100 percent attendance,lol
ronsiris 3 weeks ago 9
@ronsiris where was britain at austerlitz or leipzig? verdun? indochina/vietnam?
boss180888 2 weeks ago
The Prussians pretty much saved Wellington from being overwhelmed by diverting vital French troops and crushing the French right flank, by taking over Plancenoit (the amount of casualties there even dwarfed that of hougomont) and they also drove out the Young Guard and some battalions of the Old Guard after brutal fighting. The entire Young Guard Division lost 80% of it's strength. Plancenoit acted as a leech to the French, by draining vital troops, and relieving Wellington of pressure.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expertstrategy can you help me and answer the following question plz very important its that i dont have time to watch these videos!what was at stake in the battle of waterloo?
familyguy6668 2 weeks ago
All I can think is "The Devil's Maiden's"
DASRH 3 weeks ago
lol 1 vs 6... Vive l'empereur !
Titouellap 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Battle of Waterloo is mainly Wellington's but also Blucher's victory.
The British saved Blucher from certain defeat by agreeing to stand against the French at Waterloo, without which Napoleon would have used his entire army to crush the Prussians.
EddieExile 3 weeks ago
It's stupid for the Brits to take most of the credit. Their allies have made many significant, important contributions during the battle of Waterloo. I've already explained them to you time and time again.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
why do they fight like that, seriously? in an open field? facing the enemy and still marching forward even though their enemy is shooting at them??
orika001 3 weeks ago
@orika001 It was another generation with different to us attitude to life.
genWathier 3 weeks ago
Look an alliance of the british and the Prussians won. The British didn't win and would have lost without Blucher. The Prussions didn't and would have lost without Wellington. The alliance won. Any other reading is mere nationalist nonsense.
tigerarmyrule 3 weeks ago
This makes me want to play Empire Total War.
TheJacko177 4 weeks ago
EXTREME-RIGHT NEO BARBARIANS
unfukkkmee 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wellington totally outsmarted Napoleon by choosing his battlefield at waterloo and agreeing with Blucher that Wellington would hold until Blucher arrived.
Napoleon arrogantly and stupidly claimed he didn't need Grouchy's forces to beat Wellington.
The French imperial guard broke and fled during their last attack on the British centre.
Wellington and Blucher defeated Napoleon exactly as planned.
EddieExile 4 weeks ago
"The Prussians are the only reason why victory was won"
How dare you, sir. You've shamed yourself, you've disgraced yourself, you will answer.
What about the British infantry squares? Hougomont? General Picton? Huh? You, sir, are a deluded little f***wit! And a disgrace to the heroic gallant 1st Duke of Wellington. Get your arse off this video. The Empire will strike back.
BritishJanner 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BritishJanner, there were non-British squares too just so you know, and at Hougomount, the British Coldstream guards were accompanied by the Germans and Dutch. From 12:15-1:15, there were 1500 Germans in comparison to only 400 CG.
You really need to re-educate yourself for your own sake.
"Get your arse off this video. The Empire will strike back."
The British empire is dead. LOL. THe United States is still alive, and more powerful than any country in the world.
expertstrategy 4 weeks ago
@BritishJanner "How dare you, sir. You've shamed yourself, you've disgraced yourself, you will answer."
Damn well put. I would suggest that you go round and give the young shaver a first class rogering, but I suspect that he only attended the most minor of public schools and that there is little hope that he would learn from the experience.
oarfrost 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@oarfrost "Damn well put. I would suggest that you go round and give the young shaver a first class rogering"
Don't you mean a damn good thrashing?!!
BritishJanner 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner Wellington, Bloucher, Napoleon, they all knew if it was not for the prussian support the British lines would have broken and Napoleon would have most certainly won, historian after historian, strategist after strategist has said this, Prussia won Waterloo, If the British were not there than Napoleon wouldn't have lost, but Prussia stopped Napoleon with British support.
Chuggers456 4 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 Yes of course, because the British would have used the same tactics if the Prussians hadn't been there, y'know the fact they had a large Germanian army supporting them didn't change British tactics at all... o.O Are you a complete idiot or are you just pretending? There is NO way you could have known the outcome if the Prussian weren't there, and what does it matter anyway, are you sore that France lost or something? Poor show ol' chap, poor show!
Helios2157 4 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 Another ignorant imbecile. Again, the Prussians didn't arrive to the very end of the battle, most of the fighting had already occured and the battle was as good as over when Blucher arrived. The British were the ones who won Waterloo. We were there the whole day and the steadfast resilience of the British infantry squares which Napoleons artillary and cavalry failed to break won the day. We did most of the fighting and it's only right that we take most of the credit.
BritishJanner 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, you're forgetting that the Hanovarians, Nassauers, Brunswickers, Dutch, and Belgians all fought just as hard as the British. Chasse saved the Allied center with his counterattack when Halkett's brigade, Hanovarian, and Nassauers all failed to repell Louis Friant's Middle Guard Grenadiers.
There were many Allied squares that repelled the French cavalry charge. The Prussians arrived halfway and and secured the left flank. The main army saved Wellington from defeat.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
@expertstrategy You don't know what you're talking about, boy. The squares were mainly British with only a few Brunswickers. Naopoleon had run out of troops, Wellington had outfoxed him. The Prussians just finished off Napoleons inevitable defeat.
Napoleon got humbugged by the master.
BritishJanner 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, The Nassauers, the Brunswickers and the Netherland infantry, all were formed in squares. The remaining Allied cavalry made up of Tripp's brigade, Grant's brigade, Dornberg's brigade and the remaining effectives of the Household Brigade.
The Black Brunswickers greatly distinguished themselves against Ney's French cavalry. You see, there were many non-British and squares non-British cavalry as well.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, did it really take you this long to respond to me, and that's all you've got to say? That's just totally pathetic. The least you can do is research a little.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner The Prussians didn't arrive till the end of battle, okay we get that, but Napoleon still could have won, If you didn't notice The Prussians distracted Napoleons Forces and scared them, if Prussia had not arrived, it would have ended differently!
Chuggers456 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 I don't think many British people claim the credit all for themselves. After all Britain built up and fought alongside the Portuguese, Dutch and Spanish armies and effectively funded the Prussians, Austrians and Russians in order to get them to join coalitions against Napoleon. Without the Prussians at Waterloo there would almost certainly have been a bloody draw, and Napoleon would probably have pulled back with a force large enough to cause months more trouble if not years
thebigJM92 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 But Napoleon would not have won a decisive victory and would not have reached Brussels or driven the British and Prussians out of Belgium (which was the only way he could have won even a temporary reprieve for France from a crushing coalition blow)
thebigJM92 3 weeks ago
@thebigJM92 That may have been true, but you must remember, Grouchy could have reinforced the Main Army after Waterloo, and drove the British and Prussians out, but we will never know.
Chuggers456 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 True, but only if the Prussians had completely routed. Napoleon would probably have left him to fend off any potential threat from that direction
thebigJM92 3 weeks ago
@thebigJM92 Well he would most likely split Grouchy's forces, well actually I think he would have Grouchy imprisoned for his arrogance, he had the chance to reinforce the french lines, but instead headed off in the wrong direction.
Chuggers456 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456, Grouchy was persistent to fight the Prussians. It had nothing to do with arrogance at all. He was ordered to chase the Prussians shortly after the Battle of Ligny, and that is what he was doing. He fought the Prussians at Wavre, and when the Battle of Waterloo was over, he maintained his 30,000 troops, and defeated several Prussian attempts to destroy it. He inflicted a serious check on the Prussians at Namur.
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 Ha ha yes you are probably right there!
thebigJM92 3 weeks ago
@Chuggers456 Are you a psychic? You cannot say it would have ended differently. Napoleons troops were being slaughtered left, right and centre and he had no more reserves left. He was in no position to win the battle even before the krauts arrived.
BritishJanner 3 weeks ago
@BritishJanner, oh, and btw, i forgot to mention that there were 36 Allied squares at Mont-Saint-Jean. 20 of which are Germans, 4 are Dutch/Belgians, and 12 are British. Brits only make up 1/3 of the Allied squares. You're argument that the Brits make up the majority of the squares is utterly destroyed. LOL
I suggest you stop spewing out your nationalistic propaganda bull crap before I continue to ridicule you even more.
PWNED!!!!
expertstrategy 3 weeks ago
@expertstrategy The only thing you've "pwned" is your boyfriends ass, stupid American. Your "myth breaking" is a load of bollocks and your channel reeks of garlic and frogs legs.
Waterloo was a British victory, Commanded by the gallant 1st Duke of Wellington. Deal with it. Faggot.
BritishJanner 3 weeks ago 8