FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Britain has invaded all but 22 countries in the world





watersoul
I saw this interesting but slightly disturbing story today and thought it worth sharing here:
Quote:
A new study has found that at various times the British have invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe.

The analysis of the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world found only 22 which have never experienced an invasion by the British.
Telegraph

I already knew of course that my country had a lot of blood on its hands through history but this new research did surprise me.
I wonder if we'll ever stop, but with around 10,000 of our troops still in Afghanistan, and the 'defence' industry such a big player in our economy, I kind of doubt it.

Thoughts anyone?
Josso
Yeah well that's to do with NATO "obligations" not an entire conquer ideology bred from basically being invaded all the time ourselves.

Love the fact we got rid of almost everything as if someone saw a Roman Empire type situation on the horizon but kept a bunch of islands all around the globe presumably for strategic reasons. It's useful as we can keep an eye on lots of places but still be in the UK basically. It's a strange situation with the oversees territories, they are technically part of Britain but some have slightly different laws and some don't have the pound either which is majorly confusing. Pro tip: some of the more obscure islands are used for military/science purposes and I'm willing to bet some black ops in some cases.

Also related: BAE systems merger, great Rolling Eyes
Peterssidan
Yay, my country is one of the 22 countries. I hope it stays that way Razz

Didn't many of the invasions take place a long time ago? UK is old and has been very powerful. Being on an island it was easy to go by boat to a lot of different places.
watersoul
@Josso - Agreed, and Diego Garcia is probably in the top ten of shameful stories, forced evictions prior to the military base being created, then leased to the US for a cut price deal on Polaris missiles.
The lease is due up again in the next year or so, wonder what the new arrangement will be.

@Peterssidan - Your vikings actually invaded us many years ago! Laughing
coolclay
That's really crazy, and yet not very surprising. Speaking of Diego Garcia, did you read about the proposed marine reserve, that would effectively destroy any possibilities of the Chagossians being able to come back and subsist on the island. While I am all for marine reserves this is just a ploy to keep the Naval base up and running and keep the Chagossians away.
watersoul
coolclay wrote:
Speaking of Diego Garcia, did you read about the proposed marine reserve, that would effectively destroy any possibilities of the Chagossians being able to come back and subsist on the island. While I am all for marine reserves this is just a ploy to keep the Naval base up and running and keep the Chagossians away.

It's yet another sad example of indigenous peoples continuing to be screwed in the name of the military–industrial complex. The Chagossians have lost every battle in the UK legal system and the slow process of European Human rights courts is now their main option.

There is a WhiteHouse.gov Petition which has reached 29,000 signatures so far, it would be great if more US citizens added their voice to this scandal.

...a similar petition on the UK Government site has a shamefully low 294 signatures - one of which is mine - It would be even better if more of my own countryfolk added theirs.
nickfyoung
Being from Australia, we don't really see us as being invaded but more established by Britain. Although the indigenous population call it invaded. Each Australia Day when we celebrate the landing of the first fleet near Sydney the Aboriginals protest and claim invasion.

There is a big movement to become a republic and cut all ties with Britain. There has been a referendum but not enough support yet. They have already changed the national anthem which was a shame I reckon and are trying to change the flag.

I like it just the way it is and still consider myself more a Brit than an Aussie. I really can't relate to the ocker image of the beer swilling Aussie. After all, I was just born here from British migrating parents and probably conceived on British soil. Does that count.
I did start school there and lived in Scotland for 3 years.

One of my favorite movies is, I still have a copy, 'Zulu'. It portrays the military discipline of the British army in holding off a Zulu attack vastly out numbered. One can say Britain may not have behaved admirably over the centuries but it has the edge military wise.

One of my favorite conflicts was the Falklands. It was invaded but Britain just trotted down there and kicked A and took it back.
watersoul
@nickfyoung - I can certainly understand the Aboriginals basic argument because we did invade their land to be fair, but I'm assuming they have exactly the same rights as any other Australian these days so it would perhaps be more useful for them to contribute ideas which further develop the existing nation model you have, as so many generations have passed since then.

I still struggle to get the whole English queen being your head of state thing though, I know it's mostly symbolic but hey, it is all a bit 17th century if you ask me. I'm a Welshman living in England and I don't consider her my queen just because Edward the 1st got a result in the ancient history of 1282.

I've lived longer in England than I have Wales now and I'll support England in any sporting match against anyone except Wales, but I feel Welsh and British. My son tells me he's neutral 50/50 Welsh/English due to his English mam, but when we meet in the annual 6 nations rugby he supports England because he was born here - when Wales plays Scotland, Ireland, France or Italy though he supports Wales.

Based on that, yep, your story, it all counts and I totally understand...citizenship and feelings of nationality are certainly strange beasts to get our heads around sometimes! Wink

...oh, one of my older brothers was at the Falklands in 82 and he insists they were lucky to pull it off with the limited logistic support they had. His boots were fooked but with no available replacements he took a pair from a dead Argentinian soldier - that sort of thing seems to be the cold reality of retaining an empire Sad
deanhills
I also support Wales in rugby, particularly when it plays England. While I was living in South Africa there were and probably still are many Welsh. South Africa has a micro cosmos of England in it, as I expect Australia has too.

South Africa was one of the countries invaded by England as well. Many an evil deed took place out of greed to get their hands on its resources - particularly gold and diamonds. Sort of a long history there. So pretty much underlines what you have said. One of the epic excesses was when an English General - Lord Kitchener - had tried to starve "the enemy" into submission with his "scorched earth policy" by burning farms and rounding women and children up into concentration camps. But there were some great soldiers from England as well, who made for some epic stories to be told after the wars. Sir Harry Smith was one of my favourites. Guess war sucks, but some of the stories that came out of it, are gems. And there were of course many of the soldiers who stayed behind and made South Africa their home.

There are some amazing books that came out of the wars, and those by Joseph Lehmann from the United States are the best, if any one should be interested to read up on the history. Amazing that it was an American historian, and excellent story teller, who encapsulated that part of history the best for me, over that of any of the English or South African history books that are available. And there are many.

One that is particularly fun to read by Lehmann is a biography of Sir Harry Smith:
Remember you are an Englishman

Reminds me that I should reread it, as it's one of the best books ever. Another must-read by Lehmann is:
Echoes of War - The First Boer War

Lehmann researched his characters of the war, not only the South African wars, to the nth degree in a very loving and kind way. Thomas Pakenham from England also wrote up the history of "The Boer War" based on research of 10 years. A bit more condensed and heavy reading, but very well presented if any one is interested to read up on it.
RosenCruz
Oh those Pax Britanica days. They surelly miss em Wink
Josso
watersoul wrote:
...oh, one of my older brothers was at the Falklands in 82 and he insists they were lucky to pull it off with the limited logistic support they had. His boots were fooked but with no available replacements he took a pair from a dead Argentinian soldier - that sort of thing seems to be the cold reality of retaining an empire Sad


Indeed: as soon as you expand an empire to such distances you need incredible resources to maintain control over regions. The roman empire showed this, operation black buck showed this, ape tribes showed this.


Quote:
citizenship and feelings of nationality are certainly strange beasts to get our heads around sometimes!


Slightly less if you research I think, as long as you don't take it all too seriously (lol BNP) however I am thoroughly attached to this province and I will never leave. Definitely always felt right. My family will have been living in England 1000 years this century according to the domesday book. 300 back from now I can verify in all directions, but it's painstaking work. May have been some mixing with the french at some point though, which I blame for all my tedious characteristics Laughing

Quote:
I've lived longer in England than I have Wales now and I'll support England in any sporting match against anyone except Wales, but I feel Welsh and British.


I tell you what the Welsh have always seemed to me like the Cornish I don't know why probably the accents. I presume there is some shared history somewhere? tbh I always forget that Wales is there. Probably because it causes less problems than Ireland and Scotland lol. I filled out a form recently that allowed you to tick only one pretty unfair

PS: rain and radiation are the only things I know about Wales. Oh and the pontcysyllte aqueduct.
honken
I did a search on this topic on google, the first link that came up was about Canada.
And i wonder if its true or now?

Q
Quote:
How many countries has great Britain invaded in the last 100 years?


A
Quote:
From the 1800 - 1950 Great Britain and her Queen were looking to expand their kingdom and increase their treasury.(finances) So they sent missionaries to live among the native inhabitants of Canada, while there they learned their customs and a bit of there language. After learning enough of the languages of the different tribes/clans they sent word to the Queen, and in turn, she sent negotiators to have the different tribes/clans to sign treaties so that settlers won't get attacked while moving to Canada. But, what the negotiators orders were in fact was to tell the missionaries to lie to the natives into thinking that it was a peace treaty and to not mention that they were actually signing away their land and all its resources. Also that their children would be taken away to be educated at residential/boarding schools, which ended horribly with mass molestations and different forms of abuse by the priestss and nun's that were charged to teach and look after the native children. One of the forms of abuse was sexual abuse. That is why today there are a lot of aboriginals that are involved in drugs, pills, alcohol, and abuse in all its forms. They learned this from their parents and it passed on from generation to generation to today, generations of pain and dysfunction all beginning from the residential/boarding schools. In the end the treaties were signed and all that was left for the natives(which are no known as aboriginals of Canada) was $4-$5 a year and a small land patch which is now known as a reserve. Another concern is that back in 1800's $4-$5 a year was lots and a box a chewing tobacco was 10-15 cents, now A box of the same thing can cost more than $5. Why didn't the treaty money go up with inflation? Today alot of Canadians do not know the true story of their home country and how it was obtained. For the ones that do know, they either ignore it or try to avoid it when the question arises. For the ones that don't know at all, they simply assume that all aboriginals get everything for free (which still assumed and is mentioned today) and lash out at aboriginals verberally or violently. There is a lot speculation among Aboriginals into the current treaties today and some or all would say that Canada is not living up to it's agreements concerning the treaties of Canada. The big question now is WHY...


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_countries_has_great_Britain_invaded_in_the_last_100_years

/H
honken
And a bit "FYI"

The countries never invaded by the British:
Andorra
Belarus
Bolivia
Burundi
Central African Republic
Chad
Congo, Republic of
Guatemala
Ivory Coast
Kyrgyzstan
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Mali
Marshall Islands
Monaco
Mongolia
Paraguay
Sao Tome and Principe
Sweden Hell yeah! Smile
Tajikistan
Uzbekistan
Vatican City
RosenCruz
damn we are on the list. Queen's troops were in Ýstanbul -our former capital- around 1919 Idea
deanhills
honken wrote:
From the 1800 - 1950 Great Britain and her Queen were looking to expand their kingdom and increase their treasury.(finances) So they sent missionaries to live among the native inhabitants of Canada, while there they learned their customs and a bit of there language. After learning enough of the languages of the different tribes/clans they sent word to the Queen, and in turn, she sent negotiators to have the different tribes/clans to sign treaties so that settlers won't get attacked while moving to Canada. But, what the negotiators orders were in fact was to tell the missionaries to lie to the natives into thinking that it was a peace treaty and to not mention that they were actually signing away their land and all its resources. Also that their children would be taken away to be educated at residential/boarding schools, which ended horribly with mass molestations and different forms of abuse by the priestss and nun's that were charged to teach and look after the native children. One of the forms of abuse was sexual abuse. That is why today there are a lot of aboriginals that are involved in drugs, pills, alcohol, and abuse in all its forms. They learned this from their parents and it passed on from generation to generation to today, generations of pain and dysfunction all beginning from the residential/boarding schools. In the end the treaties were signed and all that was left for the natives(which are no known as aboriginals of Canada) was $4-$5 a year and a small land patch which is now known as a reserve. Another concern is that back in 1800's $4-$5 a year was lots and a box a chewing tobacco was 10-15 cents, now A box of the same thing can cost more than $5. Why didn't the treaty money go up with inflation? Today alot of Canadians do not know the true story of their home country and how it was obtained. For the ones that do know, they either ignore it or try to avoid it when the question arises. For the ones that don't know at all, they simply assume that all aboriginals get everything for free (which still assumed and is mentioned today) and lash out at aboriginals verberally or violently. There is a lot speculation among Aboriginals into the current treaties today and some or all would say that Canada is not living up to it's agreements concerning the treaties of Canada. The big question now is WHY...
Right on Honken. That looks about right. Vintage invasion technique. Send in the missionaries first. Then get the missionaries to ask for troops to be sent in to rescue some or other group of people who may be "under threat", sometimes themselves.

Iraq of course was one of the countries that had been invaded by Britain (Britain invaded Iraq more than once - but most recently with the US in 2003). I found this interesting YouTube show - Christopher Hitchens vs Peter Hitchens on the Invasion of Iraq - both in fantastic form. I never knew Christopher Hitchens had a brother, and a brother that is as good with the gab as he was. Their father was a naval officer, and so Peter Hitchens in his introduction mentioned that the culture they grew up in as kids in the city where they lived was: one could do great things by launching a war. That must have been a philosophy that motivated British participation in wars in general?

Here is the debate between the two of them on whether it was right to have invaded Iraq. Peter Hitchens took the position that it was wrong, and Christopher Hitchens it was right.

manfer
Considering the Britain empire is probably the more recent one in history and obviously had more chances of expansion all around the world because of better transport than in ancient days, it should not be so extrange in my opinion.

If for example the insane Alexander The Great had same resources and similar lifespan as in 19th century he will had conquered 100% of the world.
inuyasha
Mongolia? Shocked I think that's because Mongolia is just too young. It was indepent during the Chinese Civil War. Mongolia used to be a part of Republic of China. Those it was the Song Dynasty(China) that was invaded and took up by the Huns(Mongolia) and that eventually combined the two country...
I'm not sure~ Just unclear memories~ Very Happy
watersoul
@deanhills - Interesting thoughts and suggested reading, nice one...cool to not be bitching at each other for a moment as well lol Wink

Josso wrote:
I tell you what the Welsh have always seemed to me like the Cornish I don't know why probably the accents. I presume there is some shared history somewhere? tbh I always forget that Wales is there. Probably because it causes less problems than Ireland and Scotland lol. I filled out a form recently that allowed you to tick only one pretty unfair

PS: rain and radiation are the only things I know about Wales. Oh and the pontcysyllte aqueduct.

Haha, rain and radiation! Welsh lamb can be sold again now...it's been a while since Chernobyl!
My very Cornish surname is testament to the links between the two. My great great grandparents are buried in Cornwall, Grandad was a tin miner and moved to Wales to be a coal miner.
Same horse I suppose, especially as he worked the pit ponies. The two languages are also very similar, my surname is translated the same in both.

@RosenCruz - Laughing

manfer wrote:
If for example the insane Alexander The Great had same resources and similar lifespan as in 19th century he will had conquered 100% of the world.

Possibly, but it came as a heavy environmental price for Britain, it's why we have a small fraction of our forests these days...wood for shipbuilding, masts and the like.

@inuyasha - Interesting, got me googling now as I hadn't considered that, cheers Smile
Josso
Just want to add what is everyones opinion on NATO I think it's probably the UKs most "evil" invention yet. Infact as I wrote that sentence I just heard RAF jets.
deanhills
watersoul wrote:
@deanhills - Interesting thoughts and suggested reading, nice one...cool to not be bitching at each other for a moment as well lol Wink
Definitely. That made my day! Very Happy

Great topic.
playfungames
No wonder the sun never set on the British Empire. But the British could not control all the countries that they invaded right? What percentage of how many countries did it succeed in invading?
deanhills
playfungames wrote:
What percentage of how many countries did it succeed in invading?

A study has found that at various times the British invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe. Map below shows which areas had not been invaded by Great Britain. Refer article linked to map for more information about the study.

wellerchap
honken wrote:
And a bit "FYI"

The countries never invaded by the British:
Andorra
Belarus
Bolivia
Burundi
Central African Republic
Chad
Congo, Republic of
Guatemala
Ivory Coast
Kyrgyzstan
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Mali
Marshall Islands
Monaco
Mongolia
Paraguay
Sao Tome and Principe
Sweden Hell yeah! Smile
Tajikistan
Uzbekistan
Vatican City



Mmmmm.....when I'm in a real bad mood I'll take out this list and chip away at it...we'll soon get it down to zero Very Happy
I once went through Luxembourg on a bus holiday in to Italy....does that count?
deanhills
wellerchap wrote:
honken wrote:
And a bit "FYI"

The countries never invaded by the British:
Andorra
Belarus
Bolivia
Burundi
Central African Republic
Chad
Congo, Republic of
Guatemala
Ivory Coast
Kyrgyzstan
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Mali
Marshall Islands
Monaco
Mongolia
Paraguay
Sao Tome and Principe
Sweden Hell yeah! Smile
Tajikistan
Uzbekistan
Vatican City



Mmmmm.....when I'm in a real bad mood I'll take out this list and chip away at it...we'll soon get it down to zero Very Happy
I once went through Luxembourg on a bus holiday in to Italy....does that count?
I think the ol' empire will be mightily proud of you Weller (particularly those who have been in their graves for one or more centuries) .... rolling with laughter here .... Laughing
twotrophy
Most of the countries that have never been invaded are landlocked. This is probably because the British mainly travelled to these countries by sea and not by land. It wouldn't be practical to travel via land because military trucks didn't exist a long time ago. It is not only disturbing but also shocking. It would be good if the article gave the dates of the invasion.
deanhills
twotrophy wrote:
Most of the countries that have never been invaded are landlocked. This is probably because the British mainly travelled to these countries by sea and not by land. It wouldn't be practical to travel via land because military trucks didn't exist a long time ago. It is not only disturbing but also shocking. It would be good if the article gave the dates of the invasion.
I disagree. Particularly if you look at Africa, there were plenty of land locked countries that have been invaded by the British. Usually starting with missionaries.

jajarvin
Peterssidan wrote:
Yay, my country is one of the 22 countries. I hope it stays that way

Also my country has not yet conquered by the british army. Cool
RosenCruz
They had some glorious days in the past. The British Empire. It was all theirs until immigrants created a new world at America and 2 World Wars got the best of Britain.

I bet they miss those old days Wink
deanhills
Would have been totally interesting if Britain had invaded the Vatican City during "games of thrones" time. Would have changed the world completely.

Nice golden oldie thread. I MISS Wellerchap. Wonder what has happened to him?
loveandormoney
watersoul wrote:
I saw this interesting but slightly disturbing story today and thought it worth sharing here:
Quote:
A new study has found that at various times the British have invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe.

The analysis of the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world found only 22 which have never experienced an invasion by the British.
Telegraph

I already knew of course that my country had a lot of blood on its hands through history but this new research did surprise me.
I wonder if we'll ever stop, but with around 10,000 of our troops still in Afghanistan, and the 'defence' industry such a big player in our economy, I kind of doubt it.

Thoughts anyone?


Why do people speak English?
Why do people all over the world speak English?

oh so many people understand yes and no

maybe because it is because of the Govenment of London.

Maybe.
kaysch
The amount of countries is indeed surprising, the sheer fact that the British went everywhere around the world to conquer isn't really. The funny thing is that a country that has never invaded another one is associated with being weak and therefore less reputable.
loveandormoney
kaysch wrote:
The amount of countries is indeed surprising, the sheer fact that the British went everywhere around the world to conquer isn't really. The funny thing is that a country that has never invaded another one is associated with being weak and therefore less reputable.


Reputable?

Who is deciding this?
Related topics
A soldier's rant
Support Danish
Communism ?
Iran: The Next Neocon Target
Does being pro-war contrast w/ religion (e.g. Christianity)?
Rugby or NFL
The Middle East Conflict
USA invaded Iraq for ... ?
Petition to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities
Why should we bother learning different languages?
3G iPhone
[Opinion] Iraq War
My new lady... A cute Arabian filly (w/ pics, of course!)
Gadhafi vs. Obama doctrine
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.