Sometimes it can be hard watching the parody videos because, while I don’t speak it fluently by any means, I know a good bit of German and it is distracting to read subtitles for language that very obviously means something else. I have to make a concerted and constant effort to tune out my mind translating.
I have the same problem. To me, the Hitler rant videos that work best, and that allow me to disregard most easily the actual meaning of the German dialogue, are the ones in which the writers of the fake subtitles pay close attention to Bruno Ganz’s performance of each line (his tone of voice, his gestures, his emphasis of particular words, his motivation) and come up with clever subtitles which genuinely give the impression that this is what he’s actually saying and which form a coherent, plausible narrative. Ganz goes through quite a range of emotions in that clip, and a good parody dialogue will likewise shift in tone as the clip progresses to reflect this accurately. I think the “Hitler rants about the new Axis and Allies game” video is particularly good in this regard, with my favourite part probably being the line about the errata page.
Ooof, hard choice.
I’ve read a fair amount about the Napoleonic Wars, and one thing that keeps me wondering about Napoleon’s supposed skill was the total incompetency of many of his opponents. They often formed up their armies in obviously vulnerable ways that Napoleon only had to try to exploit.
Also Napoleon often made some bone headed decisions that by luck and the sheer determination of his troops paid off, namely the decisions to make an all-out frontal attack in both Austerlitz and Borodino battles.
Wellington’s record is harder to judge IMO since was basically fighting kind of a harass/keep-away campaign in Spain against lesser French commanders. The only time Wellington was in command in the main fray was the 100 Days Campaign/Waterloo. And his leadership there wasn’t particularly brilliant, indeed, the fact that Napoleon even had a chance against the superior Allied armies was due in large part to Wellington and Blucher stupidly separating their forces, allowing Napoleon to wedge them apart for a time. Wellington’s main achievement at Waterloo was to stake his forces to a good defensive position and hold. And he would have been crushed by Napoleon if the French pursuit force under Grouchy had kept closer to the main body and blocked Blucher from flanking Napoleon late in the day.
So hard to say. I think I would choose Napoleon if I were in a desperate situation and needed decisive action. Wellington would seem more appealing if time was on my side.