Why I think no one was the good guy during the Napoleonic wars. The French Revolution’s expansion led to just means for an allied coalition against Revolutionary France. HOWEVER it is important to know Napoleon was the counter-revolutionist, and did not seize power until the end of the second coalition after the treaty of Amiens. The Pillnitz declaration which led to more conflict, left Napoleon the opportunity at the siege of Toulon to become the greatest military leader history has ever seen. But the expansion also left a unreasonable burden on Napoleon for something he never did. Napoleon is very comparable to Imperial Japan. Which leaves us with the question on whether Imperialism is always morally bad. Japan was imperialist as means of protecting itself against the onslaught of Bolshevik hoards, but also, it must be understood that Japan is very poor in natural resources, and it got those resources through trading. Upon the economic warfare waged against Japan through embargoes and sanctions, they were left with no other option but to occupy most of the Asiatic basin, which was intrinsically tied to the liberation from Anglo-American colonization. Likewise I could say the same about Napoleon, his expansion to Bavaria and Switzerland, and later the confederation of the Rhine and Kingdom of Italy. Was to ensure the survival of France, exactly like imperial Japan did. I could however make an argument saying Napoleon was the good guy, as England was provoking France to submit to a debt based banking system, and Napoleons rejection of private banking cartels is a reason why the allied powers needed to destroy him unjustly.