Poll: Can England be invaded
- Thread starter Blitzkrieg8
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually too true. Some of my friends have started 'worshipping' me as a god. Simply because I'm apparently so awesome. And pretty big. I don't think I'll question them, just leave them to their devices. But we're not just BIG bastards, some of us are big BASTARDS.dontworryaboutit said:Untrue. Some of us are very big bastards. Like Vinnie Jones.Jamous said:WOOOOO!!! But we're still not invulnerable. Just irritating little bastards.dontworryaboutit said:
Checkmate.
Like that Shakespeare dude. What a dick.Jamous said:Actually too true. Some of my friends have started 'worshipping' me as a god. Simply because I'm apparently so awesome. And pretty big. I don't think I'll question them, just leave them to their devices. But we're not just BIG bastards, some of us are big BASTARDS.dontworryaboutit said:Untrue. Some of us are very big bastards. Like Vinnie Jones.Jamous said:WOOOOO!!! But we're still not invulnerable. Just irritating little bastards.dontworryaboutit said:
Checkmate.
I wouldn't question it either.
Yeah it can. Me and my friends were planning on storming Berwick and reclaiming it for the Scots.
It's 28 million available for military service, 23 million of which are battle fit.stormyfs said:
We're talking about an invasion here, so the public is not going to sit idly by and wait to be occupied. You can guarantee with the mentality of the English people that they will sign up in a heartbeat. Couple the amount of people who can fire a gun in the right direction with some of the most skilled servicemen in the world and you've got problems, especially in modern warfare environments like streets and cities. It doesn't matter how many troops they have, it's about how many troops they can get onto the island, and that's if they even get them onto the island.
The laser guns were actually a joke. I won't respond to the Spitfires and Hurricanes part because again, I don't want to turn this into a WW2 thread.
There are hardly lots of beaches for landing on, in fact there are only a handful, of which would be heavily guarded. The rest of Britains coasts are pretty much impossible to launch a full scale invasion on.
A siege mentality could work, if the siege would work. The only thing I can see happening would be a Naval Siege, and then once again, the Royal Navy being the second largest in the world have enough boats and subs to cover the coasts and defend with little trouble.
Because we're actually the ones who stole Lincoln's gold. Every Englishman knows it.Wasder said:
Speed is irrelevant. The question implies that England is hard to invade because of natural defences, i.e. water...but not when an aircraft is involved.JWAN said:
Only three or four countries?Elivercury said:
Thailand has 130 ships available, and only Gary Glitter cares what happens over there.
Plus, the same number of RN ships would have to defend the same amount of coastline as well as ferry resources to the country, the main burden of which would be shouldered by the 300 unarmed Merchant Marine vessels, anyway.
Yeah, they'll be escorted by warships, but that would drastically reduce the coastal cover.
Best bet would be something similar to the M270 MLRS, with a range of 45km. Easily defeated by the 'Goalkeeper' system (also known as 'Phalanx'). Meanwhile the attacking fleet will be returning fire with GPS guided Tomahawk Cruise Missiles (1250 - 2500km range).
By all means, a straight "we'll fight them on the beaches" assault would fail horribly, but that is why you use a strategy. Restricting yourself to one method of attack is similar to saying "we'll only stab you on the left-hand side". If you have one method of attack, then they opponent only has to worry about one method of defense. That's why war encompasses all the military branches in combined warfare.
I can assure you, I've met many female British soldiers... And yes, they may very well be happy to spam off ammo downrange, however they are not allowed to operate on the front-lines as a combat unit. Therefore that percentage of troops would not be there in the initial assault. They'll be the nurses and other REMFs that look after the actual combat units.Chipperz said:
Everyone hates whoever they go to war with anyway, so pissed off survivors won't be anything new, and while "a decent proportion of the population" may be willing, the vast majority will be untrained, ill-equipped (except in places like Moss-side, where the attacking force will need to deal with kiddies with pistols) and while enthusiasm is good, it can't be used as a replacement for body armour or effective anti-tank weapons.
Besides, as it will mostly be the cities causing the problems, once again they could utilise the strategy of starving them out, if there isn't a time limit, potential of political backlash or nuclear/biological/chemical warfare.
The OP also mentioned that it would be either a 1v1 war, or a coalition of all the other nations that attacked England, and while I admit I've swapped "England" for "Britain", the rest of my armchair general analysis has been based on as up-to-date information as I could (without breaking the law) while remaining as true as possible to the rules imposed. If the rules didn't exist, then not only would such a scenario never occur (it would be as today) but if it all did go off, then the survivors would be throwing glowy snowballs at giant cockroaches.
The Canadians had nothing to do with the burning of Washington DC. The British landed at Baltimore and pushed to Washington, and burned a few buildings before they were pushed back.Zombie Badger said:
And on topic, no country is unconquerable. It's just a matter of time.
Oh you poor deluded people.
Anyone who knows about Britains cultural attitude will know that you wouldnt NEED to invade us.
Just set up shop here, tell us that you own us and we will all go about our miserable lives.
English people are easy to please, just make sure the recycling and bins get collected once a week, get the trains to come on time and we wouldnt mind learning Russian and pledging allegiance to a new dictator.
No but seriously, Britain would be hard to capture (note I said Britain not England) as we have a lot of experience with wars, we have had involvement in a lot of conflicts since the start of the 20th Century. We are fairly advanced when it comes down to military technology, we know the island so we could defend it better and we have the SAS, possibly the greatest unit of fighters in the world.
Our only disadvantage is the lack of weapons we posess in the public sector. America is hard to invade cause everyone and their mom is packing a piece. Here in Britain we would need to rely on the army and the poorly equipped police force, as rarely does a civilian have a weapon, even if they did it would be nothing more powerful than an air rifle or low power pistol.
Anyone who knows about Britains cultural attitude will know that you wouldnt NEED to invade us.
Just set up shop here, tell us that you own us and we will all go about our miserable lives.
English people are easy to please, just make sure the recycling and bins get collected once a week, get the trains to come on time and we wouldnt mind learning Russian and pledging allegiance to a new dictator.
No but seriously, Britain would be hard to capture (note I said Britain not England) as we have a lot of experience with wars, we have had involvement in a lot of conflicts since the start of the 20th Century. We are fairly advanced when it comes down to military technology, we know the island so we could defend it better and we have the SAS, possibly the greatest unit of fighters in the world.
Our only disadvantage is the lack of weapons we posess in the public sector. America is hard to invade cause everyone and their mom is packing a piece. Here in Britain we would need to rely on the army and the poorly equipped police force, as rarely does a civilian have a weapon, even if they did it would be nothing more powerful than an air rifle or low power pistol.