The Battle of Waterloo: Opening Moves (part 1/2)

As both armies face each other, Welligton uses the cover of the hill to avoid the French 'Grand Battery'. "At 11:00, Napoleon drafted his general order. Jerome's corps would make an initial attack on Hougoumont, which Napoleon expected would draw in Wellington's reserves, since its loss would threaten his communications with the sea. A grande batterie of the reserve artillery of I, II, and VI Corps was to bombard the centre of Wellington's position from about 13:00. D'Erlon's corps then would attack Wellington's left, break through, and roll up his line from east to west. In his memoirs, Napoleon wrote that his intention was to separate Wellington's army from the Prussians and drive it back towards the sea."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo#Hougoumont

From the movie Waterloo.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• waterloo
• battle
• napoleon
• wellington
• war
• napoleonic
• musket

[sushi81]

If those prussians never show up, it would of been a whole new history. One day, I'll travel back to time and change for Napoleon!!!

[Zappiss]

@sushi81 Everything was already lost in 1815. Try instead going back in time to 1812 and persuading Napoleon not to invade Russia. If he had got rid of his continental system (which was hurting France and its allies more than Britain) and stuck with what he had, then maybe the French domination of Europe could have been maintained. Stabbing his Spanish ally in the back and putting Jerome in charge was another costly mistake for Napoleon.

[binghamblood]

Who cares where Wellington was born? Wellington himself said, "Because one is born in a stable, it does not make one a horse" when someone dared to suggest he was Irish. You don't have to be born in a country to love it and be loyal to it. Home is where the heart is :0) .

[MARccty]

the british are super sylish

[bigtimegaming1231]

what movie is this

[THthefirst]

@Napo124 Well I care, because I am interested in the battle and I enjoy debating it. I guess you care too because you reply with interesting posts too.

I agree that Napoleon was not to be underestimated, but he was a shadow of his former self by 1815 and eventually, after 20 years of war, even Napoleon couldn't keep on fighting and winning against 500-600,000 british, spanish, italians, russians, prussians, austrians who all wanted him gone.

[Napo124]

@THthefirst You are right: who cares? Maybe you and me because we are talking about opportunities in case of Napoleon winning waterloo. History is History. We can't change the world and the facts. And we can't say what will have happen after a victory. I just wanted to show you that it's to easy to say "everything was lost anyway". Napoleon was maybe too ambitious, too self confident,... but he was not stupid. He would have never try to fight if "everything was already lost".

[THthefirst]

@Napo124 The problem with your arguments is that you try to paint Napoleon's strategy as effective and successful, but acutally it was ineffective and disastrous. You mention Grouchy's failure, but Napoleon appointed Grouchy to his position. Napoleon also didn't advance on Quatre Bras after Ligny, but waited on the battlefield till 11am, allowing W to escape. You talk about "excellent beginnings" but who cares? Napoleon's strategy lost him the campaign, that is all that matters.

[Napo124]

@THthefirst Before Waterloo, there was LIGNY. And this was an unbeleivable mistake from Blucher and Wellington to have been seperated. Napoleon SUCCEED to lead his troops quickly to Belgium to DEFEAT Blucher at Ligny while Wellington retreated at Quatre Bras. This was an excellent beginning. However, Grouchy didn't success to stop Blucher as Napoleon wanted. This was why he lost the campaign. But if Blucher was stop AS Napoleon wanted, the Belgium campaign was over for Wellington and Blucher.

[THthefirst]

@Napo124 I don't understand how you can say in 1815 Napoleon didn't fail. He obviously did fail completely. He lost the campaign. The main reason for losing Waterloo was that he FAILED to stop the allies joining together, that was the very reason he lost. So I don't understand your comment that the allies were separated and that Napoleon didn't fail - surely it is obvious that the opposite is ture.

[Napo124]

@THthefirst You are right, but in Leipzig, prussians, russians, austrians, sweden, saxons,... were too many. Napoleon failed because allied troops were together. In 1815, he didn't failed, allied troops were seperated. That's why Napoleon defeated prussians at Leipzig, and english at Quatre Bras. Waterloo would have been won if Grouchy would have succeed to fix Blucher. So things were ALREADY different compare to Leipzig :)

[THthefirst]

@Napo124 But think it through for a minute - Napoleon FAILED to fight the enemy point by point in 1814 at Leipzig, which is why he was defeated - the allies joined together at the battle of the nations (hence its name!). Not separate at all. And again, in 1815 he FAILED to fight the enemy one by one as planned, and allowed them to regroup together at Waterloo, which is the primary reason that he lost the war.

Why would it have been different in 1815 if he won Waterloo? He would have lost

[Napo124]

I'm not an historian, nor a magician and because I'm french, my english is poor ^^ But Napoleon was not stupid. If he had any chance to success, he would have never try to fight. After Waterloo, he refused to continue the fight, because he knew that everything was lost. Without english and prussians in the campaign, Napoleon had chance to defeat russians and austrians. After this, we can't say what would have happened. Maybe allied countries would have decided to continue the fight, maybe not.

[Napo124]

@Napo124 Concerning Waterloo, Grouchy stoped Blucher's arriere garde, but failed to stop the whole prussian army. if he woul have succeed, Napoleon would have certainly won the battle. As Wellington said it "I need blucher or the night, otherwise, I'm lost". So we can say that waterloo could have been won. From this, the 1815 campaigne could have been won too. Davout, the most brillant Napoleon's marshall, as war minister, was reorganising the country in order to it.