WI napoleon captures the British army in the battle of waterloo and destroys the Prussian army

It seems that the book is full of the crappy ideas because in a reality it was other way around: each of the main allied forces agreed to commit 150,000 but in a reality Russians committed 200,000 and Austrians at least the same number. Nobody would believe that Britain is going to make a pact with Napoleon and it looks like the author does not understand a fundamental perception difference between the Bourbons and Nappy. The Bourbons were accepted as an equal party at Vienna but Nappy was Enemy #1.
The book actually isn't that bad, but it does show that the situation was so bad by 1815 that napoleon would have required literally everything going his way inorder for him to get a white peace.
The battle was a very reasonable way to have napoleon utterly crush Willington and blucher but the diplomatic moves he pulls off all have to succeed and thats gust not reasonable, the book is well researched and has convinced me that saying napoleon was doomed in 1815 a little far fetched is also a lot more likely then winning waterloo being a instant panacea for all his ills.
You forgot to add that for quite a few continental countries Britain was economically important as importer of their raw (and some processed) materials, aka, source of gold. OTOH, France in that sense was pretty much irrelevant and was mostly exporter of the “luxury items”.

Nappy was seriously trying to turn France into a substitute of the Britain economically but this was not working because France could not consume the available materials and could not produce the manufactured goods on the scale offered by Britain. Ditto for the “colonial goods”: Britain had more of them to offer and France simply did not have enough colonies and ships (*) to compete even if there was no war. Neither was Nappy offering something like the XIX century EU, aka, an open continental market, because his main goal was to protect and promote exclusively French economic interests.

_______
(*) In the early XIX Russian direct trade with Britain amounted to 15-30% of the imports-exports but, AFAIK, at least 80% of the total imports-exports had been carried by the British ships.
Even more importantly is that napoleon was falling to the same trap Britain did after the 7 years war, all his conquests where in the end a continuation of the monarchy polices of creating a defensible border for France, the problem being that absolut security for one nation means absolute insincerity for another, prussia and Austria would never have expected the borders napoleon wanted in Germany British subsidies or no, let alone most other European nations, so they formed coalitions and attacked when his empire looked week elsewhere. Gust like Britain had to deal whith after it gained massive security after the 7 years war then ended up defited by almost every European power do to weakness show in America.
 
Napoleon invades Spain with a huge army.
Spaniards, Portuguese and British: numbers aren’t decisive!

Napoleon invades Russia with a huge army.
Russians: numbers aren’t decisive!

7th Coalition is poised to invade France with huge armies.
Alt. His. Forum: numbers are decisive!

😉
 
Napoléon in 1815 knows that the odds are against him. He does not have the manpower to conquer new lands ; he needs all the troops he can for national defense. He will take any peace settlement he can get, to buy him time at least.
 
Napoléon in 1815 knows that the odds are against him. He does not have the manpower to conquer new lands ; he needs all the troops he can for national defense. He will take any peace settlement he can get, to buy him time at least.
Would he even be offered one? I am not sure anyone was interested in anything but his removal.
 
Would he even be offered one? I am not sure anyone was interested in anything but his removal.
Even after Leipzig, Napoleon was offered a deal in which France could retain their "natural" borders.
Britain didn't like it but Austria was much in favour and Prussia and Russia couldn't do anything without Austria and Britain couldn't do anything without Austria/Russia/Prussia.

Napoleon still thought he could win the war and let the moment pass.

It is often suggested that Hitler could have won World War II if he hadn't been Hitler.
I feel that Napoleon could have won the Napoleonic Wars if he hadn't been Napoleon....
 
Napoleon invades Spain with a huge army.
Spaniards, Portuguese and British: numbers aren’t decisive!

Napoleon invades Russia with a huge army.
Russians: numbers aren’t decisive!

7th Coalition is poised to invade France with huge armies.
Alt. His. Forum: numbers are decisive!

😉
The Spaniards and Russians weren't exhausted by twenty-odd years of war.

Iirc some of Napoleon's circle urged him to call out the French people for a levee en masse a la 1792, He didn't, because he knew they wouldn't come. He hadn't forgotten his first abdication, when he'd had to disguise himself in a British uniform for fear of being mobbed by the peasants. He knew they wouldn't do for him what their Spanish opposite numbers did for Ferdinand VII.
 
Would he even be offered one? I am not sure anyone was interested in anything but his removal.
Probably not. His only chance was to defeat each separate army decisively. Even then, they know from 1813-14 that defeating him is possible, and have no real incentive to make peace with him.
 
Last edited:
Napoleon invades Spain with a huge army.
Spaniards, Portuguese and British: numbers aren’t decisive!

Napoleon invades Russia with a huge army.
Russians: numbers aren’t decisive!

7th Coalition is poised to invade France with huge armies.
Alt. His. Forum: numbers are decisive!

😉
The difference is that Spain and Russia could just deny battle and keep fighting, Spain since most of it was guerillas anyway, Russia because it is huge.

Napoleon did not have the luxury of letting the Coalition into France and let them capture Paris and keep fighting.
 
Top