Yep. If I remember correctly, when someone in his court warned him that the Russians were a serious challenge, Napoleon dismissed it because he'd decisively beaten them only five years earlier and didn't see how they could have changed much since then. Fairly reasonable assumption, considering that progress in Tsarist Russia moved at a snail's pace.
@@looinrims Not really. Napoleon had beaten Russia in a small battle, not a war. The battle also took place miles away from Russia. This is not the case for most of Europe that was effectively under the direct or indirect control of France.
@@Amlaeuxrai in case of Napoleon... well, you do know that last soldiers of his army left russian borders in december, first month of the winter after retreating during most weeks of autumn, right?)
people don't realize how long invasions take. or that its less about the winter and more about the Russian's ability to endlessly retreat due to their country being huge.
@@sonoftheway3528 people always ignore the Russian military. That was the main factor. The battle of boradino was the single bloodiest day in all of the napoleonic war. It was a tactical draw and strategic defeat as it crippled napoleon's army. The winter just helped
@@Alex-lf5sh poles never beat Russia, it was polish Lithuanian commonwealth which attacked Russia, and therefore it got pushed back and destroyed by Russia.
Silly Napoleon, not paying attention to the high attrition and low supply limit of the Russian provinces. Like a pro, Russia took defensive ideas and simply waited for France's war exhaustion to keep increasing.
"-in hopes of a quick and easy victory." "-thought that the Russians were an inferior people that could not withstand his armies." "-destroy Russia as an enemy to focus on starving out Britain-" Hmm, where have we heard this before I wonder.
Yeah well look where they are geographically. Caught in the middle of two historically military giants. If WW2 doesn't show you just how bad the Poles have had in dealing with Russia and Germany, then I don't know what will.
Except Napoleon was putting Poland back on the map as a buffer state to Russia and counterweight to Austria and Prussia. That was smart. Invading Russia, not so. He should have kept building on Poland, and enticing the subject peoples inside Russia to rebel. Russia would need to commit forces in the west rather than retreat east when attacked. For all his brilliance he could not see this. Also, blockade Russia with Sweden help should have been arranged. Make Britain come to you.
@Bangbabangbabangbang "Oh non, les vilains Russes brûlent leurs ressources à la place de laisser à notre armée quelque chose pour se loger et se nourrir! C'est pas juste!" -Napoléon, en grelottant comme un gamin Ceux qui s'affirment supérieurs sont toujours inférieurs, c'est un classique. En 2021 ce sera le tour aux Américains d'échouer lamentablement dans l'atteinte d'un règne hégémonique.
From what I’ve read, Napoleon knew the risks of invading Russia and tried to prepare for it (studying the Great Northern War, planning to make winter quarters early, etc) it’s just that he kept being lured in by the Russians, he felt he couldn’t rightly stop advancing until he had his decisive battle.
Yeah, the Russians were clever by drawing him further and further in and also employing a scorched earth campaign. They sacrificed a many pawns, knights, rooks, and even the queen in Moscow to destroy the opponent king.
The one thing Napoleon for got about the Great Northern Wars was that Charles the madman of the North had a chance to finish off Peter I/the Great but decided to let him off. B I G - M I S T A K E.
JonatasAdoM it certainly does an old empire making a final last stand Spain = Britain a new strong dominant power entering a goleden age coming out of the conflict USA = Britain .all While Russia playing a pivotal role in both conflicts. All propagated by a mad man Hitler = Napoleon. It’s almost the exact same really
Out of 500k soldiers only 130k or so reached Borodino. Most of the French army died or deserted due to the long marches in Summer, not in Winter. That is what people miss. When winter came the war was already lost. Also the strategy of Russia of avoiding a needless fight until the enemy was exhausted was brilliant. Napoleon never had a chance against the Russians in such a long territory.
Jeremi Wiśniewski said so in 1614. He smashed entire Russian and Swedish forces after one battle (at Kłuszyn, not Moscow), and he took the capital without a single shot. The same thing said the Stephen Batory - he defeated Russia three times a row (when it was ruled by Ivan the Dangerous)
@@Lipidwave But the Poles didn't win the Polish-Muscovite War, they were driven out and only took some border provinces which they lost in like 50 years anyways. That's not a successful invasion
The cold really does bother the Russians. Russian military losses in these victories are massive never mind the civilians one due to scorched earth policies.
Another reason was that wars back then usually weren't won by one country occupying the other. Take Napoleon's wars with Austria and Prussia for example (all of which were declared by Austria and Prussia, btw): the wars were won by Napoleon defeating his enemies army in the field close enough to the enemy capital that they would not have time to muster a new army to defend it. Thus they capitulated and gave concessions. Napoleon invaded Russia thinking that Russia would fight a war in this way and such a type of war he had every reason to be confident of winning. Russia, however, decided rather intelligently that there is no reason to follow unwritten rules and conventions which does not favour them. In hindsight we know how the Russians fought and how much they were willing to sacrifice, but it was not unreasonable at the time to expect Russia to meet Napoleon in the field and to accept Napoleon's terms after being defeated and/or having their capitals threatened. It wasn't like Napoleon was trying to annex Russia.
Note that Napoleon wasn't originally trying to conquer Russia. He was hoping that a show of force at the border would cause the Russians to give in and accept the Continental System, and he had no plans for going east of Smolensk. But the shows of force kept escalating until Moscow was burned to the ground and the harsh winter destroyed the French army.
@@Oleg-l6w You realize that most of those soldiers were Russians who willingly joined Napoleone's army because they were sick of living under the serfdom!!?
@@raitiC1 You're funny. Napoleon entered Russia with 650.000 army, and left Russia with 12.000-16.000 army. If Russians had taken Napoleon's side, he would have won, no? Problem with logic?
@@Oleg-l6w First of all Russians were not the only ethnicity that was part of Russian empire! You realize that right!? And yes many Russians took Napoleon's side! And the biggest resistor to Napoleon in Russia was GERMAN landlords that literary OWNED Russians as slaves! Btw those numbers you got are taken out of...
You do a good job on making these Short history videos, there's time I want them longer but you know what keep making them short for the most part they're easy to digest.
Napoleon had some reason to think he'd come out on top; he had not only been been mostly undefeated up to that point, but also Russia had never used their self-destructive tactic to that titanic scale before. *Nobody* could have expected exactly what happened; Russia basically impaled itself and then metaphorically used its own blood to poison the French army. Mr. Moustache had no such excuse; not only was he mostly unproven of being capable of holding his own in a real battle (unless you count unprovoked invasions against countries who couldn't fight back as "a real battle"), but now there was a well-known precedent for the tactic that someone more competent would've taken notice of.
The Eastern front in WW2 was a whole another level of sacrifice and slaughter, it made the western front look like a fun holiday compared for number of deaths. I doubt moustache man would have thought the USSR were willing to throw so many lives to holt the advance and prevent Stalingrad's fall, likely expected a peace pact or surrender. But they kept coming...
Please make videos about this Why did Mongols lose in Vietnam, the border of Africa & middle east, Japan, and Nusantara? Why did Japan lose in Imjin war? Why did Nayirah lie? Why did Pinoys lose against USA? Why do Poles still demand reparations from Germany for 1939?
I can explain you about reparations. There are 2 main reasons: 1) Poland in 1944/45 was not liberated but conquered by USSR, and Stalin made my country a puppet state. As such, Poland agreed that we will receive reparations from soviet occupation zone of Germany. But we never received that. USSR started to steal our coal in huge amount, so our rulers made a deal: you stop stealing our coal and we forget about reparations. All this decisions were made while Soviets occupied Poland, so now some people think we should be given something by Germany 2) more important reason: that is bulshit invented by our ruling party, PiS, to show their voters that they "fight for polish strong position" abroad
Correction; 0:16 vs 0:19 maps on Finland are false; Finland was “ost province” of Sweden up until 1809 so in the first map Sweden should own parts of modern Finland.
Before Barbarossa Paulus who was a supplies officer in the Wehrmacht and other German officers ran an extremely realistic war game to see what would happen if (when) Germany invaded Russia. Their conclusion was that the supply chain would completely break down within 6 months. Their answer to this was we’ll have to beat them in 3 months.
They MIGHT have succeeded, had Hitler not wasted a month in a vengeance spat at Yugoslavia, and then by spreading his forces to thin and trying too many objectives at once.
@@MrSniperfox29 the idea of Blitzkrieg was too seize your objectives ignoring any side campaigns so allowing the British to escape from Dunkirk was the correct thing to do (it wasn’t) because the objective was the fall of France. Hence the siege of Leningrad, the conquest of the Crimea and the battles to annihilate the bypassed and surrounded Russian forces all held back the attack on Moscow. I think Russia was just to big for the Germans and if they had ignored the side issues they may have won but it’s unlikely.
They didn't invade in the winter Russia is just very big and it takes a long time to march through they actually got to Moscow before winter then waited for Russia to surrender they did not winter came early and Napoleon was short on supplies because the Russians adopted scorched earth tactics
Paul Paulson what you dont understand is that before the russian takeover there was no finnish identity. Therefore they had no need for such autonomy as part of sweden which they had been for a really long time. So ur crazy to say that the finnish people back then welcomed the russians (which they absolutely did not). The finns might have had a different language but their identity was as swedish as it could be.
@@cynicat74 No that's false.. Finland was a natural and integrated part of Sweden and Sweden was a far more humanitarian state than Russia. The russians let them keep all freedoms they had from when they were part of Sweden instead of forcing the laws of Russia on to them.
Feels like this thread is filled with lots of half truths. The claim that the Finns didn't have a separate identity from Sweden is simplified and seems to be rooted in civic and economic integration but ignores cultural and linguistic differences. It also ignores the fact that some Finns agitated for independence from Sweden when Finland was still a part of Sweden. Finland wasn't liberated by Russia and Finns actively resisted but also felt abandoned by Sweden. Russia attempted to capitalize on this by offering certain autonomies and rights. So yes, Finns were able to take advantage of the conquest by gaining greater autonomy then they had in Sweden. However, there are also many examples of Russia suppressing Finnish nationalism and identity, which no doubt influenced the push for full independence.
1:37 " As such, the Russians could not tolerate the idea of an independant Poland." This sentence literally summarises all of Russia's European conflicts in a nutshell.
@@watching99134 there wouldn't even be Ukraine if Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth didn't capture that part of Rus which is now known as Ukraine and Belarus. So, Poland plays a central role in Russian history and vice versa.
2:21 "Napoleon was convinced of his own genius and considered the russians to be an inferior people who would be unable to withstand his armies for very long" History really does repeat itself as 129 years later, Hitler did exactly the same thing
@@isko9201 Oh I know, I have come to the understanding that the truth I know is just one of many. All I can do is try to survive in it, don't take me too serious on here lmao.
@@reitairue2073 Russia always seems weak, like in the Finnish war of 1930s, and port Arthur. but they always manage to come out on top when there is a huge threat.
The morbidly funny part, is that it went horrible from day 1. I believe attrition, and small skirmishes had already withered away something like 30-40% of the army before he even reached Borodino. Which significantly added to deaths, and wounded, which he continued to move further into Russia. Even if he had turned around after Borodino. The invasion would still have been a catastrophe.
Another main reason why I watch & fathomly enjoy this channel, besides historic facts, are the characters & their signs & expressions. Makes me laugh, I ❤️ it
Russia: warsaw's mine France: no u *invades russia* *gets pushed back by winter* Russia: Bonaparte? More like "BLOWNAPARTE" PS:i know i stole this joke but it is too good
Russia invading Poland in 1919: *whatever it is you stay your ground* Russia loses Battle of Warsaw (Miracle at Vistula) in 1920 Russia: *RUN!* (Historically accurate)
2:52 because "he thought he was going to win" i mean, you can't argue with that logic LOL. also, he didn't win because James Bissonnet wasn't funding him
Very sarcastic! If you find in your History exam this question: why did napoleon invade Russia? , then respond like this: he thought he will win. Very brief and simple. I wish all Histories exam will be like this.
Wait, the idea was "My wars with Spain and Portugal are going badly, so let's start another one far away in a huge country known for its horrible winters."?!
Amazing video as usual! I'd also like to add that the zar was unhappy because Napoleon had promised him some gains against the Ottomans, which didn't happen. Furthermore, Napoleon was suspected of helping Sweden.
Biggest mistakes in history 1. Invading Russia during the Winter (unless you’re the Mongols) 2. Printing infinite amounts of Money 3. JFK opting for a convertible
1:00 I always wondered. In these scenes of one person fleeing offscreen while an army shoots as them, is the connotation here that they got shot offscreen? Cause that shit is dark rofl. I prefer to think that they all missed
I like how everyone kinda dismisses the Austrian attempt in 1809 as just idiocy, even though they actually handed Napoleon himself one of his major defeats at Aspern-Essling, before they ultimately lost narrowly at the Battle of Wagram, because they had adapted to French tactics. One of Napoleon’s lessons is to not fight one enemy too much, lest they learn your tricks; in the case of the Austrians, we can see that one should take this lesson to heart. When a French courtier mocked the Austrians’ military capability, Napoleon responded coldly, “You clearly were not at Wagram.”
@@ГригорийГ-ч4н It is not so easy to cut off an army, especially such a huge one. Marching to St. Petersburg would be much easier, as the Grandee Armee would march through friendly liberated Lithuania and Courland. With ports like Klaipeda or Riga the army could be supplied at least partially by ships and Napoleons position would be much better. St. Petersburg was of much more value than Moscow too, so Russian wouldn't avoid battles so much.
@@jak00bspyr72 > friendly liberated Lithuania and Courland. Pole, we both know about many, many, many rebellions of poles during times of Russian Empire. After all your people tend to be proud to the point of arrogance. But... just how many lithuanian rebellions do you remember? Lithuanians even had their Statutes in effect untill 1840. Unlike you they were not causing troubles. So why do you think they'd be more friendly to french? > With ports like Klaipeda or Riga the army could be supplied at least partially by ships. It could be, but you're forgetting that Russia had a fleet in Baltic sea. And about Brittish fleet as well. Do you really think that it would be so simple to supply army by ships? > St. Petersburg was of much more value than Moscow. Napoleon clearly thought otherwise.
It's a confirmation bias / Black Swan problem. Every year for over a decade Napoleon solved his problems (temporarily) by crushing his enemies in quick summer campaign. Why would he not expect this approach to keep working?
but just HOW was Russia able to trade with Britain when they had no land connection, and all warm-water straits were controlled by Napoleon and allies ... ??!
@@kurzackd not powerful enough to combat britain and some ships that napoleon was planning to get in copenhagen for example was destroyed by the british to prevent napoleon from gaining access to those too
The best General in the world with the world's best army could not overcome the logistics of waging war with a 1000 mile supply train on hostile ground against a brave and stubborn foe.
@@samrevlej9331 believe me its a british dream, we have never felt like we are part of europe, its insulting to us when people refer to us as europeans.
@@sausagejockyGaming I'm pretty sure the 48% of people who voted Remain might disagree a bit, but whatever you say, my fellow European ;) (Because you're not going anywhere geographically or culturally. You're still tied to us, unfortunately for us all.)
@@samrevlej9331 people like YOU are why British people dont view themselves as european, you dont know how to act, if someone says they dont like being called something you dont call it them, i bet you call every black person the n word and every italian a wop, disgusting.
Well that sounds familiar... 1:34 "Poland could be used as a launching point for an invasion into Russia. As such, the Russians could not tolerate an independent Poland, unless it accepted the Russian Emperor as its king."
History fans: Why would Napoleon invade Russia?
Napoleon, who steamrolled all the continental powers of Europe: Why would I not?
Yep. If I remember correctly, when someone in his court warned him that the Russians were a serious challenge, Napoleon dismissed it because he'd decisively beaten them only five years earlier and didn't see how they could have changed much since then. Fairly reasonable assumption, considering that progress in Tsarist Russia moved at a snail's pace.
Including Russia*
Because russians fight like mongols, not like any western nation
@@looinrims Not really. Napoleon had beaten Russia in a small battle, not a war. The battle also took place miles away from Russia. This is not the case for most of Europe that was effectively under the direct or indirect control of France.
@@MWENDA-vv5im “not a war”
He literally beat them in the war of the third coalition and the war of the fourth coalition
"He thought he was going to win."
Well, that explains a lot.
Tell's you all you need to know
haha
Echoed 180years later in Afghanistan by first Russia and then the US.
Just like a certain putin…
The Russio-Ukraine war: hello there
"DoNt InVadE RUssiA iN thE WinTeR"
Napoleon and Hitler who invaded in June: "My goodness what an idea, why didn't I think of that"
Russia/USSR=Ah shit, here we go AGAIN
@@givemethen-pass6182Lol
Or just dont invade Russia ever 😁
@@Amlaeuxrai in case of Napoleon... well, you do know that last soldiers of his army left russian borders in december, first month of the winter after retreating during most weeks of autumn, right?)
What most people dont know is that russian winter didnt beat Napoleon.
Typhus did
tfw Napoleon invaded in June yet everyone thinks he invaded in the winter
people don't realize how long invasions take.
or that its less about the winter and more about the Russian's ability to endlessly retreat due to their country being huge.
ITeach You sometimes retreat can be a really good war tactic
true, point is there were a lot of factors. not just the winter
Well to be fair in Australia winter is June to August. Maybe out boi was fan
@@sonoftheway3528 people always ignore the Russian military. That was the main factor. The battle of boradino was the single bloodiest day in all of the napoleonic war. It was a tactical draw and strategic defeat as it crippled napoleon's army. The winter just helped
“Quick and easy victory over Russia”
File under “ideas that never ever work”
*Mongols, Poles and Japanese want to know your location*
@@Alex-lf5sh Plus the Germans in the first World War.
Napoleon did it like 3 times before
@Nicholas II of Russia Germans caused the Bolsheviks revolution by sending Lenin back to Russia.
@@Alex-lf5sh poles never beat Russia, it was polish Lithuanian commonwealth which attacked Russia, and therefore it got pushed back and destroyed by Russia.
"History doesn't repeat itself,
but it does rhyme."
- Mark Twain
905 likes without a reply? Wow
@@adhprakash this comment is proof of the bystander effect
@@adhprakash y did u comment?
I honestly don't get it...
Wait, 2 years ago? What were you talking about? The war only started in February.
Looks like Napoleon's empire post-Russia was...Blownaparte
Underrated
10/10 burn
@@wtfwtf2956 stop with this, "underrated" is not equal to "good joke", not every joke has to be the most liked one
@@rzul Stop being a jerk. Or the Kaiserliche Garde is going to get ya!
I'm screaming
Silly Napoleon, not paying attention to the high attrition and low supply limit of the Russian provinces. Like a pro, Russia took defensive ideas and simply waited for France's war exhaustion to keep increasing.
this is some advanced EU4 stuff
And destroyed everything as they retreated leaving them nothing useful
Hi to my EU4 brothers!
*PARADOX INTENSIFIES*
Pro Russian Player take quantity
More meat for meat grinder!
"-in hopes of a quick and easy victory."
"-thought that the Russians were an inferior people that could not withstand his armies."
"-destroy Russia as an enemy to focus on starving out Britain-"
Hmm, where have we heard this before I wonder.
Hitler lived after Napoleon...
@Arnold
But didn't learn from Napoleon's mistakes, which was my point.
Sweden
"wanted to starve Britain" . . . Didn't they have a huge ass empire at the time?
@@prion42 to starve BRITAIN, not the BRITISH EMPIRE, think twice before you comment next time
"The second issue was Poland".
They just can't catch a break
Poland:
Germany: Fuck you, Poland
Russia: Fuck you, Poland
Yeah well look where they are geographically. Caught in the middle of two historically military giants. If WW2 doesn't show you just how bad the Poles have had in dealing with Russia and Germany, then I don't know what will.
then what do we Belgians have to say? We have been like every great nation's boxing ring troughout history
Except Napoleon was putting Poland back on the map as a buffer state to Russia and counterweight to Austria and Prussia. That was smart. Invading Russia, not so. He should have kept building on Poland, and enticing the subject peoples inside Russia to rebel. Russia would need to commit forces in the west rather than retreat east when attacked. For all his brilliance he could not see this. Also, blockade Russia with Sweden help should have been arranged. Make Britain come to you.
@@SilverFang2789 Those two weren't military giants until about 1700.
Napoleon: **takes Moscow** "I won, right? Right?...."
**Slavic hardbass gets louder in the distance....**
little did he know that the boss had a second phase.
and that's when he knew, he fucked up
Poles who took Moscow without a single shot in 1614: *Oh c'mon!*
Also Moscow was not the Russian capital at that time
@Bangbabangbabangbang "Oh non, les vilains Russes brûlent leurs ressources à la place de laisser à notre armée quelque chose pour se loger et se nourrir! C'est pas juste!" -Napoléon, en grelottant comme un gamin
Ceux qui s'affirment supérieurs sont toujours inférieurs, c'est un classique. En 2021 ce sera le tour aux Américains d'échouer lamentablement dans l'atteinte d'un règne hégémonique.
Love how in Napoleons ideal Europe the English isles just don’t exist
*british isles
Lots of people’s ideal Europe tbh
Even the British....
Even without naponleons ideal Europe the English isles don't exist
he aint wrong
From what I’ve read, Napoleon knew the risks of invading Russia and tried to prepare for it (studying the Great Northern War, planning to make winter quarters early, etc) it’s just that he kept being lured in by the Russians, he felt he couldn’t rightly stop advancing until he had his decisive battle.
Yeah, the Russians were clever by drawing him further and further in and also employing a scorched earth campaign.
They sacrificed a many pawns, knights, rooks, and even the queen in Moscow to destroy the opponent king.
@@marlonmoncrieffe0728 Turned Napoleon's strength into his weakness. Napoleon could never resist an opportunity to outmanouvre his enemy
The one thing Napoleon for got about the Great Northern Wars was that Charles the madman of the North had a chance to finish off Peter I/the Great but decided to let him off. B I G - M I S T A K E.
Hey Napoleon, why are you invading Russia?
Napoleon: “Be Cossack can.”
😂😂😂
Napoleon: I got Moscow
Alexander: ok
Napoleon: so you gonna surrender?
Alexander: no
Alexander fingers a box of matches;
"Hey Napoleon you look after the holy city, it's very prone to fires in summer."
@@alanpennie8013 lmao
Winter: 👁👄👁
Better than that, he didn't reply
Wait Alexander is from greece right and he died since bc
"Our armies will cover moscow"
"We will fight in Siberia."
Motivation:100
Badass:100
JonatasAdoM
No, Tsar Alexander said: “If necessary, I will at least be the emperor of Kamchatka, but I will not surrender”.
See you in Petropavlovsk
JonatasAdoM it certainly does an old empire making a final last stand Spain = Britain a new strong dominant power entering a goleden age coming out of the conflict USA = Britain .all While Russia playing a pivotal role in both conflicts. All propagated by a mad man Hitler = Napoleon. It’s almost the exact same really
@@alexgainsborough4921 that's a lot of determination there
Out of 500k soldiers only 130k or so reached Borodino. Most of the French army died or deserted due to the long marches in Summer, not in Winter. That is what people miss. When winter came the war was already lost. Also the strategy of Russia of avoiding a needless fight until the enemy was exhausted was brilliant. Napoleon never had a chance against the Russians in such a long territory.
Russia did this against Germany too
To be fair some of those that didn't reach Borodino were left behind as detachments at vital points along the way.
IMHO, a significant part of those who did not reach Borodino were in garrisons, supported the supply system, and so on.
@@Ломпадкасветлая ah so you want to kill more french i see? baguette? oh wait no i meant vodka?
@@IsraelCountryCube you high or something?
“Let’s invade Russia”
-Someone who could not invade Russia
@@insulam821 Cough Cough Poland aswell
Sebastian Szeliga oh yeah they did as well
Jeremi Wiśniewski said so in 1614. He smashed entire Russian and Swedish forces after one battle (at Kłuszyn, not Moscow), and he took the capital without a single shot.
The same thing said the Stephen Batory - he defeated Russia three times a row (when it was ruled by Ivan the Dangerous)
@@Lipidwave But the Poles didn't win the Polish-Muscovite War, they were driven out and only took some border provinces which they lost in like 50 years anyways. That's not a successful invasion
Never forget the Brest-Litovsk!
0:50 Britain "I don't feel so good..."
Its just disappeared
Just have mistaken animation lel
but if you close your eyes...
It’s not a mistake. It’s Napoleon’s wet dream.
@@lightningfletch5598 you made my day😂
Napoleon: Brace yourselves, winter is coming
Russia: The cold doesn’t bother me anyway
Most of the names of the characters in Frozen are Russian
@@lidulkadut really? I though they were scandinavian
It did in the Winter War
The cold really does bother the Russians. Russian military losses in these victories are massive never mind the civilians one due to scorched earth policies.
LET IT SNOW, LET IT SNOOOOOW! LET THE HUNGER FLOW!!
Another reason was that wars back then usually weren't won by one country occupying the other. Take Napoleon's wars with Austria and Prussia for example (all of which were declared by Austria and Prussia, btw): the wars were won by Napoleon defeating his enemies army in the field close enough to the enemy capital that they would not have time to muster a new army to defend it. Thus they capitulated and gave concessions. Napoleon invaded Russia thinking that Russia would fight a war in this way and such a type of war he had every reason to be confident of winning. Russia, however, decided rather intelligently that there is no reason to follow unwritten rules and conventions which does not favour them. In hindsight we know how the Russians fought and how much they were willing to sacrifice, but it was not unreasonable at the time to expect Russia to meet Napoleon in the field and to accept Napoleon's terms after being defeated and/or having their capitals threatened. It wasn't like Napoleon was trying to annex Russia.
Russia and not following international rules
Iconic duo
Note that Napoleon wasn't originally trying to conquer Russia. He was hoping that a show of force at the border would cause the Russians to give in and accept the Continental System, and he had no plans for going east of Smolensk. But the shows of force kept escalating until Moscow was burned to the ground and the harsh winter destroyed the French army.
Important to point out that Moscow was burnt down by Russians though
Moscow then was not the capital, so its burning almost did not harm Russia itself.
But Napoleon's army of 600 thousand soldiers died very stupid.
@@Oleg-l6w You realize that most of those soldiers were Russians who willingly joined Napoleone's army because they were sick of living under the serfdom!!?
@@raitiC1 You're funny. Napoleon entered Russia with 650.000 army, and left Russia with 12.000-16.000 army. If Russians had taken Napoleon's side, he would have won, no? Problem with logic?
@@Oleg-l6w First of all Russians were not the only ethnicity that was part of Russian empire! You realize that right!? And yes many Russians took Napoleon's side! And the biggest resistor to Napoleon in Russia was GERMAN landlords that literary OWNED Russians as slaves!
Btw those numbers you got are taken out of...
"Because... he thought he was going to win"
I LOVE IT!!!
You do a good job on making these Short history videos, there's time I want them longer but you know what keep making them short for the most part they're easy to digest.
map correction needed @ 0:16:
Russia (dark green) conquered Finland in 1809, in 1799 it was still a part of Sweden (light blue).
Napoleon: "Our forces are tied up in the West. Let's open up another front in Russia!"
Hitler: "Great idea!"
“Never invade Russia from the west.”
-Genghis Khan
Duran he has absolutely never said something like this in his entire life
Affentaktik “After I die people will start to quote things I didn’t say”
- Genghis Khan
@@affentaktik2810 "Don't believe everything you read on the internet"
- Genghis Khan
@@affentaktik2810 "Too many whamen"
- Genghis Khan
@@affentaktik2810 "lmao XD"
- Genghis Khan
0:51 like how the UK just disappears
I love the ending explanation. It's so simple, yet so true.
Napoleon had some reason to think he'd come out on top; he had not only been been mostly undefeated up to that point, but also Russia had never used their self-destructive tactic to that titanic scale before. *Nobody* could have expected exactly what happened; Russia basically impaled itself and then metaphorically used its own blood to poison the French army.
Mr. Moustache had no such excuse; not only was he mostly unproven of being capable of holding his own in a real battle (unless you count unprovoked invasions against countries who couldn't fight back as "a real battle"), but now there was a well-known precedent for the tactic that someone more competent would've taken notice of.
The Eastern front in WW2 was a whole another level of sacrifice and slaughter, it made the western front look like a fun holiday compared for number of deaths. I doubt moustache man would have thought the USSR were willing to throw so many lives to holt the advance and prevent Stalingrad's fall, likely expected a peace pact or surrender. But they kept coming...
Russia: *exists*
Everyone: It's free real estate
Russia: *reverse uno card*
2prize good one
Mongol: *UNO Reverse Card*
It’s free real COMMUNIST STATE
omfg SHUT THE FUCK UP WITH THIS STUPID, FUCKING COMMENT, YOU FUCKING MORON
@@PANZERFAUST90 STFU AND SUCK THIS BIG THING
That remake of Napoleon Crossing the Alps during the patreon mentions is just stellar.
Napoleon invades Russia.
Russia: I'm going to do what's known as a pro gamer move.
Please make videos about this
Why did Mongols lose in Vietnam, the border of Africa & middle east, Japan, and Nusantara?
Why did Japan lose in Imjin war?
Why did Nayirah lie?
Why did Pinoys lose against USA?
Why do Poles still demand reparations from Germany for 1939?
Evan Pangaribuan his ships got drowned when sailing for japan twice
Why can I not believe it's not butter!?
Poles don't want reparations we've got silesia and pomerania and warmia as reparations only our retarded govemment does
@@ThePiotrekpecet Inb4 Storm Prussia, the poles cant stop all of us, god with us.
I can explain you about reparations.
There are 2 main reasons:
1) Poland in 1944/45 was not liberated but conquered by USSR, and Stalin made my country a puppet state. As such, Poland agreed that we will receive reparations from soviet occupation zone of Germany. But we never received that. USSR started to steal our coal in huge amount, so our rulers made a deal: you stop stealing our coal and we forget about reparations. All this decisions were made while Soviets occupied Poland, so now some people think we should be given something by Germany
2) more important reason: that is bulshit invented by our ruling party, PiS, to show their voters that they "fight for polish strong position" abroad
Correction; 0:16 vs 0:19 maps on Finland are false; Finland was “ost province” of Sweden up until 1809 so in the first map Sweden should own parts of modern Finland.
Before Barbarossa Paulus who was a supplies officer in the Wehrmacht and other German officers ran an extremely realistic war game to see what would happen if (when) Germany invaded Russia. Their conclusion was that the supply chain would completely break down within 6 months. Their answer to this was we’ll have to beat them in 3 months.
They MIGHT have succeeded, had Hitler not wasted a month in a vengeance spat at Yugoslavia, and then by spreading his forces to thin and trying too many objectives at once.
@@MrSniperfox29 the idea of Blitzkrieg was too seize your objectives ignoring any side campaigns so allowing the British to escape from Dunkirk was the correct thing to do (it wasn’t) because the objective was the fall of France. Hence the siege of Leningrad, the conquest of the Crimea and the battles to annihilate the bypassed and surrounded Russian forces all held back the attack on Moscow. I think Russia was just to big for the Germans and if they had ignored the side issues they may have won but it’s unlikely.
No one invades Russia in winter and wins.
Except of course, the Mongols.
OctagonDinosaur *Crash Course World History Intensifies*
Mongols: we are the exception
Pretty sure napoleons invasion didn't start in the winter
They didn't invade in the winter Russia is just very big and it takes a long time to march through they actually got to Moscow before winter then waited for Russia to surrender they did not winter came early and Napoleon was short on supplies because the Russians adopted scorched earth tactics
And Poles.. and Lithuanians... and to some extent even Vikings...
Sweden had finland 1799. In the first map it is displayed that russia controlled it during that time which is incorrect.
Paul Paulson wtf ur crazy. What do you mean liberated? They were forcibly annexed against their will.
Paul Paulson what you dont understand is that before the russian takeover there was no finnish identity. Therefore they had no need for such autonomy as part of sweden which they had been for a really long time. So ur crazy to say that the finnish people back then welcomed the russians (which they absolutely did not). The finns might have had a different language but their identity was as swedish as it could be.
@@NickWestin Nobody said the Finns welcomed the Russians. He said Finland had more rights under Russia, than they did under Sweden, which is true.
@@cynicat74 No that's false.. Finland was a natural and integrated part of Sweden and Sweden was a far more humanitarian state than Russia.
The russians let them keep all freedoms they had from when they were part of Sweden instead of forcing the laws of Russia on to them.
Feels like this thread is filled with lots of half truths.
The claim that the Finns didn't have a separate identity from Sweden is simplified and seems to be rooted in civic and economic integration but ignores cultural and linguistic differences. It also ignores the fact that some Finns agitated for independence from Sweden when Finland was still a part of Sweden.
Finland wasn't liberated by Russia and Finns actively resisted but also felt abandoned by Sweden. Russia attempted to capitalize on this by offering certain autonomies and rights. So yes, Finns were able to take advantage of the conquest by gaining greater autonomy then they had in Sweden. However, there are also many examples of Russia suppressing Finnish nationalism and identity, which no doubt influenced the push for full independence.
1:37 "
As such, the Russians could not tolerate the idea of an independant Poland."
This sentence literally summarises all of Russia's European conflicts in a nutshell.
Nah
Right now it seems to revolve much more around Ukraine.
@@watching99134 there wouldn't even be Ukraine if Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth didn't capture that part of Rus which is now known as Ukraine and Belarus. So, Poland plays a central role in Russian history and vice versa.
2:21 "Napoleon was convinced of his own genius and considered the russians to be an inferior people who would be unable to withstand his armies for very long"
History really does repeat itself as 129 years later, Hitler did exactly the same thing
Now, hilariously, Russia did the same in Ukraine.
@@reitairue2073 your western propaganda who lies 24/7 is doing the same thing
@@isko9201 Oh I know, I have come to the understanding that the truth I know is just one of many. All I can do is try to survive in it, don't take me too serious on here lmao.
Hitler got extremely closer to win funnily enough, despite not being as good of a military mind as hım.
@@reitairue2073 Russia always seems weak, like in the Finnish war of 1930s, and port Arthur. but they always manage to come out on top when there is a huge threat.
I really enjoy your videos , they are funny and educational in the same time.
0:03 - You should have lit Napoleon on fire in this cut scene.
Great video! You're a great inspiration for my new channel, so it's always great to see another video from you! Great video once again! 😊😊
The morbidly funny part, is that it went horrible from day 1. I believe attrition, and small skirmishes had already withered away something like 30-40% of the army before he even reached Borodino. Which significantly added to deaths, and wounded, which he continued to move further into Russia.
Even if he had turned around after Borodino. The invasion would still have been a catastrophe.
"In the Year 8, or 1799 as it's normally known" killed me
Laughs in Revolutionary Calendar.
The United States gained its independence on year 5 according to the revolutionary calendar.
napoleon: ok watch out, it’s winter
russia, *HA YOU FOOL*
In June?
Napoleon failed invasion of Russia: *_exists_*
Hitler: u know what would be a good idea
*Soviets sieze Berlin 3 years later*
*4
4*
I mean, it worked in WW1 when they started fighting themselves as opposed to the Germans.
@@axelandersson6314 *when germany supported the bolshevik revoulution.
Only 2nd nation to successfuly invade russia.
@Ionasku Alexander I See a man of culture
Another main reason why I watch & fathomly enjoy this channel, besides historic facts, are the characters & their signs & expressions. Makes me laugh, I ❤️ it
Napoleon: tries invading Russia and fails
🇩🇪: *laughs in imperial german*
At least we french took moscow germans no
@@Hugo-cn9no they literally abandoned the city, set fire and took the food with them.
It was a trap
Well, the only country able to take and hold Moscow was Poland-Lithuania it seems
@@eisenkoenig8324
France: runs into spear trap (Moscow)
Also France: “We did it guys, mission was a success!”
Igor XDDD
“Yeah we defeat Russia for 2 years”
Poland disappears for 123 years
I keep coming back just to hear the “he thought he was going to win” lmao
I love how at @0:50 for Napoleon's dream of Europe, the United Kingdom has disappeared!
I was looking away for a second and got absolutely jumpscared by the gunshot at 0:22 - pay attention in history class kids
Russia: warsaw's mine
France: no u
*invades russia*
*gets pushed back by winter*
Russia: Bonaparte? More like "BLOWNAPARTE"
PS:i know i stole this joke but it is too good
Russia invading Poland in 1919: *whatever it is you stay your ground*
Russia loses Battle of Warsaw (Miracle at Vistula) in 1920
Russia: *RUN!*
(Historically accurate)
@@Admiral45-10 lol
That's why it's dumb.
Hitler visiting Napoleon's tomb in Paris: I will no repeat your mistakes.
*Proceeds to invade Russia to isolate Britain.
You should totally do a video on the peninsular war!
2:52 because "he thought he was going to win" i mean, you can't argue with that logic LOL. also, he didn't win because James Bissonnet wasn't funding him
Very sarcastic! If you find in your History exam this question: why did napoleon invade Russia? , then respond like this: he thought he will win. Very brief and simple. I wish all Histories exam will be like this.
Your map for 1799 is wrong. For instance, Finland didn't belong to Russia at the time. That's ten years later.
And we still had bassarabia
"He thought he would win" - said everyone who invaded Russia...
Wait, the idea was "My wars with Spain and Portugal are going badly, so let's start another one far away in a huge country known for its horrible winters."?!
How to not get doomed
Step 1 : " Never Invade Mother Russia "
Amazing video as usual! I'd also like to add that the zar was unhappy because Napoleon had promised him some gains against the Ottomans, which didn't happen. Furthermore, Napoleon was suspected of helping Sweden.
3:13 where’s Kelly moneymaker
"He thought he going to win" ain't that why everyone do things in the first place?
It's also not a reason "why" (Napoleon could have also conquered say Serbia, but why wouldn't he do that instead?)
"The poles in Napoleon said no"
I die of laughter
I just finished epic history’s series on the napoleonic wars and this short is bluuudy fantastic!!
everyone: teams up to fight russia
russia: anyways, see you in paris
Russia only reached Paris as part of a team.
The most obvious reason he invaded was because he fought he was going to win.
Love it.
Biggest mistakes in history
1. Invading Russia during the Winter (unless you’re the Mongols)
2. Printing infinite amounts of Money
3. JFK opting for a convertible
1:00 I always wondered. In these scenes of one person fleeing offscreen while an army shoots as them, is the connotation here that they got shot offscreen? Cause that shit is dark rofl. I prefer to think that they all missed
Never considered it
"Quick and easy" and "invade Russia" do not belong in the same book, let alone the same sentence.
I like how everyone kinda dismisses the Austrian attempt in 1809 as just idiocy, even though they actually handed Napoleon himself one of his major defeats at Aspern-Essling, before they ultimately lost narrowly at the Battle of Wagram, because they had adapted to French tactics. One of Napoleon’s lessons is to not fight one enemy too much, lest they learn your tricks; in the case of the Austrians, we can see that one should take this lesson to heart. When a French courtier mocked the Austrians’ military capability, Napoleon responded coldly, “You clearly were not at Wagram.”
"Everyone has a plan until they get smacked on the mouth." - Mike Tyson
Wait is history matters now a part of that armchair historian-alternatehistoryhub crossover?
I think it's just a big coincidence but would be cool if it was
yeah something is fishy
Napoleon needed all of Ukraine's wheat to make a giant baguette for James Bisonette.
Top 10 most accurate war movies
Can you do a video on Yugoslavia and it’s collapse
"He thought he was going to win." Perfect.
What if Napoleon marched along the Baltic Sea to Sankt Petersburg instead to Moscow?
Or tried to defeat Russian army in Ukraine.
Years Obrejac
Never heard of the Siege of Riga? Don't worry, hardly anyone has (apart from readers of the Hornblower stories).
Than his overextended army would be just cut off suplies and decimated in a different region.
@@ГригорийГ-ч4н It is not so easy to cut off an army, especially such a huge one. Marching to St. Petersburg would be much easier, as the Grandee Armee would march through friendly liberated Lithuania and Courland. With ports like Klaipeda or Riga the army could be supplied at least partially by ships and Napoleons position would be much better. St. Petersburg was of much more value than Moscow too, so Russian wouldn't avoid battles so much.
@@jak00bspyr72
> friendly liberated Lithuania and Courland.
Pole, we both know about many, many, many rebellions of poles during times of Russian Empire. After all your people tend to be proud to the point of arrogance. But... just how many lithuanian rebellions do you remember? Lithuanians even had their Statutes in effect untill 1840. Unlike you they were not causing troubles. So why do you think they'd be more friendly to french?
> With ports like Klaipeda or Riga the army could be supplied at least partially by ships.
It could be, but you're forgetting that Russia had a fleet in Baltic sea. And about Brittish fleet as well. Do you really think that it would be so simple to supply army by ships?
> St. Petersburg was of much more value than Moscow.
Napoleon clearly thought otherwise.
Too much victory does weird things to the psyche.
It's a confirmation bias / Black Swan problem.
Every year for over a decade Napoleon solved his problems (temporarily) by crushing his enemies in quick summer campaign.
Why would he not expect this approach to keep working?
Napoleon:Stop trading with Britain!
Russia: Oh yeah? You and what army?
Napoleon: THIS army!
General Winter: Thanks, it was delicious.
but just HOW was Russia able to trade with Britain when they had no land connection, and all warm-water straits were controlled by Napoleon and allies ... ??!
Trading with SHIPS, UK destroyed much of the french navy at Trafalgar and uk was pretty much the master of the seas
@@Je-suis-pauvre yeah, ok, but Napoleon's ALLIES still had navies, which would have prevented, no??
@@kurzackd not powerful enough to combat britain and some ships that napoleon was planning to get in copenhagen for example was destroyed by the british to prevent napoleon from gaining access to those too
@@centurymemes1208 interesting... ok, thanks!
I love how Napoleon is simultaneously waving in the final screen and doing the Roman Salute.
Great job on the video!!
You should do some stuff that's a little more modern as well.
Ridley Scott should have watched this first.
"Why did you invade Russia?"
"Because I could."
0:25 U forgot about austrians giving krakov area to duchy of warsaw
0:17 Finland was part of Sweden
The best General in the world with the world's best army could not overcome the logistics of waging war with a 1000 mile supply train on hostile ground against a brave and stubborn foe.
Love your content man! But when are you going to make a 10 minute history video again?
Love the detail that Britain is just erased in France's ideal map
An authentic French dream...
@@samrevlej9331 believe me its a british dream, we have never felt like we are part of europe, its insulting to us when people refer to us as europeans.
@@sausagejockyGaming I'm pretty sure the 48% of people who voted Remain might disagree a bit, but whatever you say, my fellow European ;)
(Because you're not going anywhere geographically or culturally. You're still tied to us, unfortunately for us all.)
@@samrevlej9331 im not european, have some respect for your betters, hahah we are very differently culturally already.
@@samrevlej9331 people like YOU are why British people dont view themselves as european, you dont know how to act, if someone says they dont like being called something you dont call it them, i bet you call every black person the n word and every italian a wop, disgusting.
0:44 so he’d need many shovels to get rid of england
Love your series here
Well that sounds familiar... 1:34
"Poland could be used as a launching point for an invasion into Russia. As such, the Russians could not tolerate an independent Poland, unless it accepted the Russian Emperor as its king."
2:52 "He thoought he was going to win."
Oof... Just oof.
I just worked out the key reason to why war starts: the attacker thought that they were going to win
Napoleon: “Damn the Russian winter got hands. *I wonder if somebody else would loose the same way I did.”*
(Angry German noises)
Funny thing. While Hitler failed, the German Kaiser successfully invaded and won in ww1.
@@Suksass I mean, Russia was basically falling apart at that point.
@@krealyesitisbeta5642 Yes, thanks to Germany beating them on the battlefield.
@@Suksass Germany just increased speed of collapse, but Nicolas 2 has already problems with Russians and others.
Watch Epic History TV's Napoleon retreat from Moscow.
It was one of the most brilliant tactical survival retreats in history.
Great video. Michel Ney, what a demon.
A little bit tense... I love this guy
Eddie Izzard: "Napoleon had been steaming in there 100 years before: I'm gonna kill them, oh it's a bit cold, it's a bit cold."