Childhood is thinking Hitler should've won. Adulthood is realizing Napoleon was the one who should've prevailed

Childhood is thinking Hitler should've won. Adulthood is realizing Napoleon was the one who should've prevailed.

Attached: wp1892213.jpg (1920x1080, 378K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_and_the_Jews
twitter.com/AnonBabble

They both failed attempting to do the same thing so they both suck.

>attempting to do the same thing
How do you figure?

>attempting to do the same thing

Attached: muttopinion.png (750x523, 347K)

Franco-Germanic cucks, vs the strong Russian BVLL.

Attached: image-w1280.jpg (1280x720, 100K)

COCAINUM

Conquering Europe, invading Russia

That's like saying Trump and Jeb Bush were similar because they both wanted to be president. It's a shallow comparison that completely glosses over the night and day difference between Napoleon and Hitler as far as ideology and policy go.

Childhood is thinking the prophecied messiah is a conqueror of foreign lands, adulthood is knowing the messiah is a savior of souls.

They were similar...they wanted to be the most powerful man on the face of the earth. I would say that common interest would make them similar.

>they wanted to be the most powerful man on the face of the earth
And you base this according to what?

You’re arguing semantics, it’s a childish intellectually dishonest pissing contest. Jesus Christ.

fpbp

It's not semantics you just claimed Napoleon and Hitler wanted to be the most powerful men in the world what do you base this off of? I'm merely asking for a source

>it’s a childish intellectually dishonest
What's intellectually dishonest about my post?

Napoleon is a zionist shill

Change my mind

Zionism didn't exist when Napoleon was clanging and banging in Europe

No trump and Jeb bush are similar in that they both wanted to be president.

When i say Zionist i mean jew lover not supporter of Israel,sorry if i complicated for you.

No I can't find any evidence suggesting Napoleon had a thing for Jews. Do you have any?

Enlightenment is knowing Hannibal should have won.

Galaxy brain is knowing the Persians should have conquered all of Greece.

Yes he destroyed the monarchy system that was prevalent in europe,the same monarchy system that hated the jews and made the same jews that supported a free america(the continent as a whole)

>Yes he destroyed the monarchy system that was prevalent in europe
Hitler was against Monarchy too does that mean he likes Jews? That's a silly rationale friend. Is an assumption based on bad logic the only evidence you have?

The French Revolution (and the Napoleonic Code) birthed social justice and Zionism.

Napoleon ruined everything

>*And the same jews* that supported a free america

I'm talking about napoleon not hitler tho.

Hitler supported a fascist regime almost similar to the monarchist one

>I'm talking about napoleon not hitler tho.
And I'm pointing out the holes in your logic. Assuming Napoleon was pro Jew just because he was against Monarchy was silly.

>Hitler supported a fascist regime almost similar to the monarchist one
And Napoleon declared himself Emperor and headed a Monarchist system himself what is your point exactly?

>Hue doesn't realise how Britain, Prussia and Austria were all bankrolled by the same jewish family, the Rothschilds.

Revolutionary France enacted laws that first emancipated Jews in France, establishing them as equal citizens to other Frenchmen. In countries that Napoleon Bonaparte's ensuing First French Empire conquered during the Napoleonic Wars, he emancipated the Jews and introduced other ideas of freedom from the French Revolution. For instance, he overrode old laws restricting Jews to reside in ghettos, as well as lifting laws that limited Jews' rights to property, worship, and certain occupations.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_and_the_Jews

>Hey, my fellow zion brothers, this guy Napoleon in his Rev. France is giving us jews a lot of cool possitive laws.
>LETS SPONSOR HIS ENEMIES
jej

Is the typical jewish tactic of gain money and power,they do this even in today society with ((republican)) and ((democrats)).They don't choose side they only choose profit.

Oh yeah spreading the cancer of the revolution world wide. The French did not abandon the revolution by electing and crowning him. Quite the contrary, he was the vessel for the revolutionary ideas he was the strong man. The fathers of revolution were degerate proto leftists and spergs, they lived predominantly in the realms of their utopian ideas and were not suited for real life. Napoleon in the other hand was a functioning embodiment of the revolution an actual man of the world able to govern, he's the Jesus for Robespierre.
Same with Stalin. He too was born through the revolution and in the case of Russia the fathers of the revolution were dysfunctional, autistic, degenerate wife swapping fucks and kikes like Trotsky. Stalin on the other hand was the strong man, and a leader who turned the cluster fuck into a super state. Yet he carried the ideas.
This is why USA is so lucky. The founders of our revolution were autistic intellectuals as well, (I mean read Jeffersons bio, fucker wasted a shit ton of money on a useless mansion and a nigger operated elevator kek). The only difference is that:
a. The strongman(Washington) was there from the start and was given power.
b. There was an external enemy to direct all the chaos and violence at.
Hitlers idea wasn't that radical. If the choice is between natsoc and nationalism why not the latter? Eugenics and social darvinism? Both US and USSR played with it. The revolution Hitler was leading was a reactionary revolution. It wasn't a completely new and independent idea. Communism created Hitler. If Germany won ww1 there would be no Hitler and no natsoc. There would be Gott, Kaiser und Vaterland.

After Napoleon refused to adopt the general staff organizational hierarchy, he was bound to lose. A one man show can only take you so far, even if you're a military genius.