British accounts have tended to magnify out of all proportion the accomplishments of the very modest numbers of British soldiers. The British supplied only 1/4 of the 120,000 soldiers who defeated Napoleon at Waterloo. For example of the 26 infantry brigades in Wellington's army, only 9 were British. A combination of politics and pride refused to allow that Napoleon's destruction was due to anything other than British pluck and dash and the genius of Wellington. The present state of affairs is not better, welcome to the dodgy world of hype, in which the Duke is pumped up like mammoth beach ball.

Wes Ulm writes: "How do we gauge the relative significance of a given military encounter in the annals of world history? We naturally tend to focus on the loudest, heaviest clashes that shout their intensity in the most overt tones—the Stalingrads and Verduns, those massive set-piece conflagrations that pit enormous standing armies in each other’s firing lines. We also tend to zero in on “decisive” battles that were crucial in determining the outcome of a war. A decisive battle can also be one that permanently and fundamentally alters the state of affairs for the war’s aftermath; the Fall of France to the Germans in 1940 and Britain’s catastrophic defeat against the Japanese in Singapore in 1942 both had momentous impacts over and above the war’s immediate causes themselves, since they undercut the physical and psychological bases for the British and French empires and undercut these countries’ capacities to suppress independence movements, causing their colonial realms to crumble... Thus, in my criteria, what matters most is the effect that a particular decisive battle had on the course of historical events."

Map: In 1942 Germany was the allmighty conqueror and master of Europe.

I can understand why the battle of Stalingrad is considered by most military experts as the most important battle in history.
Battle of Moscow 1941 and Battle of Kursk were also important. If there was no victory on the Eastern Front all Europe would speak German.

The battle of Stalingrad was one of the largest battles in human history. It raged for 199 days. The German public was not officially told of the disaster until the end of January 1943. It was not the first major setback of the German military, but the crushing defeat at Stalingrad was unmatched in scale. Stalingrad, Kursk, Moscow, D-Day, Guadalacanal, all these were epic battles, and very important victories as the enemy was in his peak. I would add several more battles: the Siege of Vienna (if not won the Turks would capture big part of Europe), Marathon, Yorktown and Gettysburg (important for the American Continent). But Waterloo ? Give me a break.
Waterloo was the last battle of Napoleon, and nothing more.

Waterloo was not the largest battle in history. On the Waterloo battlefield were 180,000-190,000 combatants. This is slightly more than at Gettysburg (150,000-160,000) but less than Solferino (1859) - 215,000, Sadowa (1866) - 230,000, Vienna (1683) - 270,000, Gravelotte (1870) - 300,000, or Sedan (1870) - 320,000, to name just few.
Waterloo was not even the largest battle of Napoleonic Wars. At Bautzen were up to 200,000 combatants, at Borodino 250,000, at Wagram 300,000, at Dresden 350,000 and at Leipzig half-million.
Waterloo was not the bloodiest battle at history. The casualties (killed and wounded) for both sides averaged 22 %. At the battle of Sadowa 1866 the losses (killed and wounded) averaged 23 %, at Gettysburg 1863 were 25 %, at Kunersdorf 1759 - 31 %, at Zorndorf 1758 horrific 37 %. Waterloo was not even the bloodiest battle of Napoleonic Wars.

There was also nothing unusual about Napoleon being defeated. According to David Chandler the Emperor lost as many as 10 battles. Several examples below:
- Aspern-Essling 1809 (lost to the Austrians)
- Viazma 1812 (lost to the Russians)
- Leipzig 1813 (lost to the Russians, Prussians, Austrians and Swedes)
- La Rothiere 1814 (lost to the Russians, Bavarians and Austrians)
- Waterloo 1815 (lost to the Germans, Brits and Netherlands)

Waterloo was also not the only lost campaign of Napoleon. The invasion of Russia in 1812 was a catastrophe, in 1813 the campaign in Saxony was a total failure, in 1814 the campaign in France was a final defeat that ended with Napoleon's abdication.

Map: During the Waterloo Campaign in 1815 Napoleonic France was alone and weak, and without Allies. France was no longer the almighty Empire of previous years. Shortly after Napoleon's arrival in Paris, the Allies undertook to provide over 850,000 men between them. According to Chandler France's resources (250,000) "were stretched pathetically thinly." The Allies attacked France but there was no uprising against the invaders. The people of France were physically and emotionally drained by 25 years of war. Several French generals defected to the Allies. "The [French] soldiers were upset at the excessive number of senior officers who had betrayed, or who were suspected of being ready to betray the emperor..."