[goto11]

"because of Napoleons ambitions" - it is pretty unfair to lay the blame for the wars solely on Napoleon. The wars started because the monarchies of Europe ganged up against France after the revolution because they saw France was weakened and they wanted to prevent the ideas of the revolution to spread. Napoleon rose to prominence during these wars but just happened be be an extremely successful general. When France started winning, the propaganda of the monarchies like England painted him as a "madman" who wanted to "conquer the world", but from the viewpoint of France these were defensive wars.

Of course England at the time was fighting merciless wars of conquest all around the world in building their colonial empire. So they couldn't claim there were anything morally wrong with conquering the world. Instead their propaganda focused on the fact that Napoleon was a commoner rather than of old royal stock - something which was both offensive and scary to the old monarchies.

[jerry40]

I understand your point of view. Of course I simplifed his reasons too much. But still, I have strong impression that he was too 'romantic' and passionate to be a winner who would remain in the history of mankind as one of the greatests rulers. His war in Russia was unbelievably daring plan, for example. Did he just want to be equal to Batu khan and others who had taken Moscow too? I would not be surprized at all. Again, it is just my personal impression, it can be far from reality of course.

[hristov]

It is pretty fair I think to blame it solely on him. Yes, they started as defensive wars, and yes he did a great job defending the republic. But at some point they turned into offensive wars. One can argue at what point exactly defense turned into lust for conquest but it is beyond doubt that this happened. You do not conquer most of Europe out of desire to defend yourself.