No need to be crude.
And your posting begs the question, that if you're going to speak and write negatively on Napoleon, why don't you study the man and what he did and accomplished?
Sorry, but it sounds like a heavily biased viewpoint and not the result of historical inquiry. That would tend to support the idea is that all you're doing is repeating the old 'Black legend' and 'Corsican Ogre' nonsense. And as far as I can see, you've done the same to Berthier, merely repeating second and third hand inaccuracies that are based on Jomini's nonsense.