"This puts him in a new light" Topic

Yes rather natural for a long conversation to drift over into several other subjects. Always felt rage towards going off topic slightly odd.

Would the real re-enactor in this thread reveal himself…

Mal and others,

The eyewitness source is Michel Étienne Descourtilz (1775-1835), a French naturalist who had the misfortune to be working on the island during the revolt. Despite having a passport signed by Toussaint Louverture, he was taken prisoner by the rebels and later liberated by the French. He wrote several books on his work and experiences and mentions the etouffiers with some disgust.

However, despite the sensationalist Daily Nazi article, there is no evidence in anything that I have read that indicates that Napoleon either approved of, or even had any knowledge of, the alleged "gas chambers".

Jurgen

Mal Sabreur

You just don't get it, do you? Vikings, Hitler, Nazis, SS – duh! This is a NAPOLEONIC thread. I suggest you go back to one of your Universities where I am sure they will try to explain it to you.

If he was French then Napoleon must have known about and agreed to it – after all, according to some of the sad souls that attend this site, he is responsible for every bad thing that ever happened

ve hav vays of making you hate Napoleon Ja. NAH!

As I have young Gazzola on stifle, I am always amused to imagine the machine gun spittle flecked barrage contained in his "three rounds rapid" posts… Though not enough to actually read them…

Ed,
Yes agree, its odd really. Rather like talking in a pub & telling others to shutup & only talk about what you yourself want to talk about. Hmm, I may try it, once, and see how it goes …. :)

Ben

My vision of Gazzola is of a figure somewhat like the utterly deranged Fuhrer in the famous, and much re-captioned, scene from Der Untergang.

Peeler,

If you do that I would advise you to book the ambulance in advance:).

Jurgen

The Playing with History thread was cross posted to ZOMBIES and FANTASY RPG boards. Clearly anything goes on that thread.

This thread started out with a comparison of Messrs. N. and H. One would think that the discussion of Nazis here would unavoidable.

Back on the subject matter: Is the method of execution important or is it the fact that executions occurred that is important?

The DM article implies that the book in question tries to link use of gas chambers as an idea that H. copied from N. Seems like you have to find some pretty odd correspondence to seriously try and make such an odd claim.

Alternatively that there were mass executions carried out on N.'s authority in Haiti is in little doubt. That this level of violence occurred in Haiti before N.s usurpation of power is also clear so in that sense he was just carrying on with the status quo. Not much for Mr. H. to have gleaned from this, as this was all standard counter revolutionary/slave rebellion/ tribal warfare practice of the times, if at the extreme end of the curve.

That N. sought to reestablish slavery on a formerly emancipated population is something of a historical rarity. However the idea that H. used this as his justification for using slave labour also seems like it would need an extraordinary level of proof in order to make the claim stick.

Despite the sensational nature of the article in question, it did shine a light on some of N.'s less glorious activities and some that I have heard admirer's of the man deny knowledge of in the past. In that sense it will serve to educate some regardless of the hype intended.

Bob

'The eyewitness source is Michel Étienne Descourtilz (1775-1835), a French naturalist who had the misfortune to be working on the island during the revolt. Despite having a passport signed by Toussaint Louverture, he was taken prisoner by the rebels and later liberated by the French. He wrote several books on his work and experiences and mentions the etouffiers with some disgust.'

Title?

Or are you playing 'I've Got a Secret?'

B

F,
Yes sound advice. Of course, I would also try it whilst eating a banana, to see if that made any difference.
P

Brechtel198,

Yes, there is a title and, if you learn to ask nicely rather than like a particularly pompous schoolteacher, I will consider telling you what it is. You really do need to get over yourself.

I do not own any Kate Nash albums but we are playing the soundtrack of From Dusk Till Dawn;).

Jurgen

'Yes, there is a title and, if you learn to ask nicely rather than like a particularly pompous schoolteacher, I will consider telling you what it is. You really do need to get over yourself.'

How petty. Typical I guess. Are you now playing the 'knowledge is power game.?

Thanks anyways, but I have the books now.

B

Dusk Till Dawn – good film but no bananas.

Brechtel198,

No, not petty; just fed up with an utterly biased, socially inadequate arrogant jerk of an former artilleryman who thinks that he is THE expert on the Napoleonic period and that he can behave as if he owns the forum and address people as if he was their superior in some way. Gazzola is no longer the solitary inhabitant of my stifle bin.

Jurgen

Peeler,

Actually, I believe that there is a banana in one scene:).

Jurgen

'…just fed up with a socially inadequate arrogant jerk of an former artilleryman who thinks that he is THE expert on the Napoleonic period and that he can behave as if he owns the forum and address people as if he was their superior in some way.'

We think alike as I was 'impressed' with you in the same way. It is quite obvious that you cannot converse in a civilized manner with anyone who disagrees with you.

I certainly hope that you do not treat subordinates in the same way. I've served with people who act the way you do and it is a very difficult task to put up with them. Fortunately, they were few and far between.

B

Peeler, You say, "The good thing about conversations, in the pub or online, in that they go with the flow & go where they go. And its always interesting, wherever it goes." That is absolutely true -and only a complete bore refuses to let the conversation flow but forever tries to bring it back to HIS point.

Gazzola "Mal Sabreur

You just don't get it, do you? Vikings, Hitler, Nazis, SS – duh! This is a NAPOLEONIC thread. I suggest you go back to one of your Universities where I am sure they will try to explain it to you."
As has already been pointed out to you, The "Playing with History" thread is also posted in "General" and "Zombies" As a keen zombie gamer, I object heartily to you posting comments about Napoleon on this message board. Had it been perhaps, the great Necromancer or whatever the Russian equivalent of the Ferach Emperor is called in Flintloque, I could perhaps have forgiven this misdemeanour.

You STILL haven't explained why you have objected to the references to Hitler and the Nazis throughout this thread. Please do so and enlighten us as to how we are supposed to discuss an article that claims Hitler was at least influenced by Napoleon WITHOUT FLIPPIN' WELL MENTIONING HIM!
Oh, sorry. I Forgot. IT'S A NAPOLEONIC THREAD! DUH!

Actually, just to widen our periods still furher, didn't Hitler get his idea for concentration camps form the British during the Boer War?…. AARGHHHHH!!!!!

Cheers Flecktarn. I'll look out for it.

Mal,

Could we possibly write "Führer und Reichskanzler" as those were Hitler's titles? If we did that, Gazzola could not object to the use of the word "Hitler". Another alternative would be "GröFaZ".

I think that Gazzola is objecting because he believes that the Napoleonic boards should be "pure" (which is rather a Nazi concept really) and that any mention of any other historical period should not be allowed on them, even when it is the subject of the thread. That would be a form of forum apartheid. He seems to be both inflexible and to have a need to control the threads.

However, I do have another theory to explain his objection:).

Jurgen

If the "Playing with History" thread was posted on the Zombies board, that would imply that:

1. There are zombie reenactors

2. That someone thinks that zombies are part of history.

Both of those are vaguely worrying.

Jurgen

@Flecktarn,

I have no idea as to number two, but with regards to number one…

runforyourlives.com

Regards

Whirlwind,

Thanks for that; the makeup is excellent (I hope).

Jurgen

Watch from 6 Mins 30 Seconds

Remind you of anyone?

YouTube link

Paul :)

F, I shall have to watch that film again soon :)
Mal, I agree. Perhaps I should stop bringing up bananas.

As for Boer War concentration camps!! Totally different meaning & not connected. No, no, no :)

Brechte198

Looks like the problem with Flecktarn, Mal Sabreur and possibly one or two others is jealousy. They just can't cope with anyone knowing more than them, plus the fact you always pull their sad little pretend-to-look-intelligent-and-unbiased posts to pieces.

And surprise, surprise, the blow up doll lover Flecktarn has run to the stifle. And he stifles me but can't stop talking about me. What is wrong with these people?

And have you noticed how Mal Sabreur, just like Flecktarn, love talking about Hitler and the Nazis because they both use ANY EXCUSE to mention them in their posts. They just CAN'T HELP themselves! And the fact that people like them want to try and compare Hitler and Napoleon in the first place, as if they were the only two characters in history, exposes their lack of knowledge and utter bias.

Rather sad really, isn't it. And you wonder why some people might be put off Napoleonics with people like this around. Anyway, I don't think intelligent and Napoleonic loving people should waste any further time on such a dumb and biased topic infested with blinkered Neanderthals.

Gazz,
Nice long post, but nothing about the relevant thread topic at all. Do you wonder why you're stifle count is so high?
Peeler

"And have you noticed how Mal Sabreur, just like Flecktarn, love talking about Hitler and the Nazis because they both use ANY EXCUSE to mention them in their posts. They just CAN'T HELP themselves! And the fact that people like them want to try and compare Hitler and Napoleon in the first place, as if they were the only two characters in history, exposes their lack of knowledge and utter bias."

But surely, if this thread started on the premise that Hitler admired Buonaparte, in the very first post, then it is reasonable that Hitler and Buonaparte are going to be discussed and compared? That is what this thread is about. So how can you, reasonably, complain about it?

Chouan,

May I be permitted to point out the fundamental flaw in your post?

You are asking how Gazzola can reasonably complain about it.

Expecting Gazzola to do anything reasonably is surely the triumph of hope over experience;).

Returning to one of your earlier posts, and probably infuriating Gazzola even further, your father was a very lucky man to have survived being Bomber Command aircrew; I believe that their casualty rate was staggeringly high. Unlike many Germans, I do think that the bombing campaign against Germany, although brutal, was both necessary and justified.

Jurgen

"Rather sad really, isn't it. And you wonder why some people might be put off Napoleonics with people like this around. Anyway, I don't think intelligent and Napoleonic loving people should waste any further time on such a dumb and biased topic infested with blinkered Neanderthals"

Do pots and kettles spring to mind?

Chouan.
"But surely, if this thread started on the premise that Hitler admired Buonaparte, in the very first post, then it is reasonable that Hitler and Buonaparte are going to be discussed and compared? That is what this thread is about. So how can you, reasonably, complain about it?"
That's all I'VE been trying to say and have received absolutely no response except abuse and absolutely NO valid reason.

The idea that GröFaZ was in some way inspired by the alleged French use of extemporised gas chambers would appear to be utter nonsense for two reasons:

1. It is extremely unlikely that he would ever have heard of the Haiti campaign, let alone the alleged gas chambers.

2. All of the evidence about the origination and development of the use of homicidal gas chambers by the Nazis indicates that it was driven by relatively junior SS personnel on the basis of practical necessity and that Hitler had no involvement in either deciding on it as a means of killing or of being involved in even a remote way in its development.

Jurgen

From Flecktarn:

Comparisons between Napoleon and Hitler are generally invalid expect for certain limited and quite detailed matters…

From Brechtel198:

Certain external and by no means accidental similarities between Napoleon's career and that of Hitler have blinded some men to the far more significant contrasts…

It is a good job there was lots to argue about on this thread…

Apart from Gazzola, obviously. I can't see the thread that he is talking about, perhaps someone would post a link?

What a predictable and pointless hate-fest this has become. I'll make two points;

1. the differences between the careers of Napoleon and Hitler are much more meaningful than any similarities that you might be able to find. One of the key differences is in the way Europe spiraled into war during the two era's. The demonical Hitler did everything he could to escalate the tensions and conflicts, and he was hell-bent on pulling the whole world into War, whereas the British did all they could to try and prevent the disaster. This is quite clear with hind-sight, very few people would deny it.
With Napoleon almost the exact opposite was true. He went out of his way to save the peace of Amiens whereas it was the British who did everything they could to drag Europe back into war. Even the "neutrals", i.e. the continental European monarchs understood this at the time. Napoleon was interested in diplomacy and concession, whereas Britain deliberated used Diplomats whose orders were to antagonize Napoleon. Their geo-political actions show that they were not interested in up-holding the peace. The British thought that they could defeat France in the long run because they controlled the Seas and knew that they could keep paying European Nations to declare War on Napoleon.
A balanced reading of history from 1801 to 1804 will show this. I am prepared to defend this view, although I am quite busy this weekend so anyone who disagrees with me will have to be patient.

2. All I see on this thread is the usual baiting of Gazzola and Brechtel, and then attacking them personally when they rise to the bait. This approach from the likes of Flecktarn is nothing if not predictable. If I have said it once I have said it 100 times, personal attacks rather than actually de-constructing the arguments of people is not a useful approach to take. Deconstructing content with content, arguments with counter-arguments, is far more useful than all these rather personal side-swipes. If you cannot see ever see eye to eye with someone maybe its better in the long run to stifle them, but if so have the integrity to keep quiet rather than popping up in order to attack and then run away again.
Attempts to try and bully Gazzola and Brectel off the forum will not work, you should all know by now that they are made of sterner stuff. An honest appraisal of the TMP Napoleonic collective will tell you all that there are far more people here who believe that the sun still shines out of Britannia's bottom and that She could do no wrong during the Napoleonic period. John & Kevin may be abrasive at times but they are a necessary counter-point to the overall and rather obvious bias of the collective. Deal with it.

@TW,

I will be fascinated to read the primary sources you put up showing how British ministers plotted to re-start the war with Napoleon. Lots of letters to and from the Prime Minister please, rather than pro-Napoleon opinion and supposition.

What actually never changes on this forum is how aggressive Kevin and John are. It is their personal side-swipes one experiences, and their refusal to acknowledge that other posters content and argument have value when it deconstructs any part of their Napoleonic myth.

Attempts to try and bully Gazzola and Brechtel off the forum will not work, you should all know by now that they are made of sterner stuff.

This is laughable, literally laughable. It is other posters (Dave Hollins, Peter Hofschroer, Steven Smith, "Un Ami" etc.) who have been chased off this forum.

An honest appraisal of the TMP Napoleonic collective will tell you all that there are far more people here who believe that the sun still shines out of Britannia's bottom and that She could do no wrong during the Napoleonic period

This is simply incorrect. There are very few posters on the Napoleonic Boards going out of their eay to extol the virtues of the British state in the early 1800s. Nothing could contrast more than the posters who make it their life's work to defend the Napoleonic myth on every front and aggressively try to beat down any criticism of it.

Regards

"This is laughable, literally laughable. It is other posters (Dave Hollins, Peter Hofschroer, Steven Smith, "Un Ami" etc.) who have been chased off this forum."

Exactly

Chased off by people who have incompentence in knowledge but who are good in offending others whose only guilt is another opinion and a superior knowledge.

To talk of Brechtel198 and Gazzola being bullied is, frankly, ludicrous as they are the two biggest and most consistent bullies on this site.

Gazzola's behaviour is so outrageous and bizarre that one can only conclude that he either has psychological issues or is abusing either drugs or alcohol.

Sweeping claims that more people on this forum are pro-British than pro-Napoleon in a Napoleonic context are, as Whirlwind has pointed out, nonsense. There is no evidence whatever to support such a claim. However, I suspect that there are more people on here who do not see Napoleon as the perfect human being and utterly faultless statesman and ruler than those who do.

Jurgen

British Bomber Command – lost 55,000 out of 125,000 approx. Pretty severe eh.

@Peeler,

One of the most interesting statistics I have seen about aircrew casualties was reproduced in the notes of John Terraine's 'The Right of the Line', lifted from a table sent by the Air Member for Training to the Air Member for Personnel, 16 Nov 42, giving the percent chances of survival at this point in the war (figures in brackets for one tour then two tours):
Heavy & Medium Bombers 44%/19.5%, Light Bombers 25.5%/6.5%.

Day fighter pilots were about the same (43%/18.5%), but poor old Torpedo bomber pilots were 17.5%/3% !!!!

Regards

Good grief, that's awful!

My father always said that Torpedo Bombers were the worst of the lot! He was particularly fortunate in that he trained for Stirlings (Flight Engineer), and by the time he was ready for Ops the Stirling IV was beginning to be phased out as a bomber, so his tour, as bomber aircrew, was relatively short. The Stirling IVs were then converted to glider tugs, and he was involved in Arnhem and the Rhine crossing, but most of his Ops seem to have been in Transport duties, although his aircraft did make a weapons drop to the Resistance in Denmark. His booklet records "light flak" from the dropping zone. His cousins and uncles were all in the Merch; another dangerous occupation.

Chouan,

Then he was indeed a very fortunate individual.

From the "other side", U Boat crew deaths were approximately 70% over the course of the war.

I believe that infantry, who most people would regard as having the worst job of all, had appreciably lower death rates than either Bomber Command, U Boats or the British Merchant Navy.

Jurgen

Wouldn't the stats for "light" bombers be skewed somewhat by the massacre of Fairey Battle squadrons, and the insane loss suffered by ground attack aircraft during the Normandy campaign?

And is there any chance we can blame this on Napoleon?

Well, if N hadn't gone & lost, then it could have all been so different = yup, its all his fault :)

A colleague of my father's, long after the War when he had gone to sea in the Merch as an Engineer, and was working in London as an Engineer Superintendant, visited the Blohm & Voss Repair Yard in Hamburg. Whilst waiting to see the bloke he was meeting, he saw that the room had photographs on the wall of a ship being torpedoed and then sinking. On closer examination he found that the ship was one that he had been on when it had been torpedoed and sunk. Quite a coincidence! The Blohm & Voss bloke, with who he had the appointment with then came into the room, and saw him looking at the photographs. He remarked that they were interesting, and the German replied that he had taken them; my father's colleague then explained that he had been an Engineer onboard when the ship was sunk. They became good friends, their friendship and business relationship lasting until the Blohm & Voss bloke's death

Clealry Napoleon ignited Prussian nationalism which led eventually to conflict with Great Britain : )

Of course at some point GB switched from opposing France to opposing Germany so….

How's that?

Bullies: Who can say. The idea of not engaging B or Gaz because that would be bullying them seems to imply they need some special protection. It's a notion I doubt either of them would subscribe to, but that of course is my opinion only.

@SM,

Yes for the Battles and Blenheims, no for Normandy (the figures are from the end of 1942). Although I'm not sure the word skewed is exactly right – massacres like that were an appreciable part of being a light bomber or torpedo bomber pilot 1939-42!

Regards

Supercilius Maximus,

Well, one could argue that Napoleon's humiliation of Prussia and domination of Germany resulted in the upsurge of pan-German nationalism that resulted in German unification, the humiliation of France in 1870-71, and the desire for an overseas empire and a navy to protect both such an empire and the trade needed for German industry to thrive, which in turn resulted in a conforntation with Britain.

Those issues partly resulted in the EWK, the defeat in which resulted in the German economic collapse, which in turn resulted in the rise of the Nazis.

Therefore, it was all Napoleon's fault:).

Jurgen

Chouan,

That is a quite amazing story.

Jurgen

I rest my case. The just can't help themselves!

TelesticWarrior

Good post but it is a waste of time trying to reason with Flecktarn and Co.

The problem is that if someone throws personal insults at someone who admires Napoleon or says anything positive about Napoleon or challenges their posts, it does not count.

Best thing is to just laugh at their posts .

Now I'm off .

Jurgen, further to the "Smoggie" interest, for want of a better word, there is a strangely funny dubbing of a "Postman Pat" children's animation here YouTube link which demonstrates the smoggie accent quite effectively. I'm afraid that the language used is rather extreme…..