What is the hardest country to invade?

[Foxbat Flyer]

As everyone seems to be saying, Russia would be the winner of all this... But i also think Australia would be up there (Good luck crossing all that country to get to the other side of Aust, Very Costly) and we would give one hell of a fight (At least i would)

 

[ReservoirAngel]

Hardest: USA. Other countries would come to their aid.

I'm not too sure about that. America don't really seem to be in the "making friends" business on the global scale. I doubt any country would rush to their aid unless they were 100% obligated... which brings up the unfortunate business of me living in the UK, probably the only country that has some kind of contractual obligation to always help America out in whatever shit it gets itself into.

But if someone's launching a full-scale assault on America, taking out its lap-dog ***** nation shouldn't be too much of a problem for them given they must already have bollocks the size of boulders to even be taking on America in the first place. A small island would be no problem.

There are 28 countries in NATO. NATO is as close to a 100% obligation a country could have.

Ah. See I have no real idea of what NATO is or what it actually does. I assumed it was a US Military thing, not a "help us out if we're in the shit" contract with the rest of the world.

With this new information... yeah attacking America will fuck your shit up faster than anything else in human history.

 

[astrav1]

I'd go with either US or Russia for the gun nuts and cold respectively.

 

[band43seat]

i could only think that longest would b isreal, they are surronded by enemy nations and have some of the best military force on the planet, they already know how to hold their own against the enemy in their terrain, so it would take a while for them to get invaded

 

[vxicepickxv]

Canada Obviously anyone stupid enough to attack one of the most liked Countries in the world that has a army that technologically at least is near on par with the USA, and Canada has the best allies of all time. That's right I'm talking to you.

I only want to protect western Canada though. I'm not a big fan of Quebec.

If you've ever played a certain flash game you know this to be Madagascar...

Aircraft are a little bit bigger than diseases, and would pretty much ignore the order. Napalm away.

Hardest: USA. Other countries would come to their aid.

I'm not too sure about that. America don't really seem to be in the "making friends" business on the global scale. I doubt any country would rush to their aid unless they were 100% obligated... which brings up the unfortunate business of me living in the UK, probably the only country that has some kind of contractual obligation to always help America out in whatever shit it gets itself into.

Well, there is the whole NATO thing. Plus there's the fact that until we lose reserve currency status, we kind of have the world by the balls.

 

[cthulhumythos]

Costliest: USA (Has the best equipment specialized in destroying high tech weapons and vehicles, which cost a lot)
Hardest: USA (They continuously have the most advanced and widely adapted in army technology)

tactical advantage. whilst everyone is staring at the fireworks on the fourth of july, that is when you strike. you take the major institutions, greatest landmark tactical advantages. the Us is arrogant. "hurr, no one dares to invade on the 4th of july!"

... you do realize that we don't just turn off all of our defenses for that one day right? 'cause that would be really friggin stupid.
(i can't wait to find out this post was actually sarcastic and then feel like a fool)

anyway...

usa or russia for the various reason already pointed out by more eloquent posters.

 

[rayen020]

this is kind of a subjective question with lots of variables. Does the country know your coming? what is the national mood? and the country's army and how it's dispersed is very important. for example if someone tried to invade the US right now since national satisfaction is so low, our army is overstretched and mostly overseas and our population is deeply divided i think it would be easy to take the US over right now provided you offered the right alternative.

historically speaking Russia would be the hardest however a properly equipped army could probably take it fairly easily if it didn't advance too quickly. and china or india with its massive populations could put alot of bodies on the feild but suppling them properly might be problematic.

in the categories listed
bloodiest;China - lots of people easily conscripted, plus factories and cheap labor allows quick production of weapons.
costliest; the USA - multiple terrian types requireing different equipment that may only be used once. also an insurgent war would almost certainly follow.
longest; brazil or congo - large countries with very isolated population centers, and lots of very difficult terrian to navigate. forests provide hiding places that could last for years wihtout detection.

overall;the USA
reason;although the army is overstretched it is not gone and has the ability to return very easily. although the country is politically divided all parties would agree being conquered is a pressing problem and most citizens would unite against a foriegn invader. the US is a very large nation with various types of terrian that provide natural defences. the US has industry provides quick production of materials nessecary for defence.

 

[Booze Zombie]

The U.K, there would be a lot of resistance and there's a lot of chokepoints, assuming it's a land war.

 

[supermariner]

Costliest: i imagine would be to invade your own country. You'd have to pay for the firepower AND the repairs afterwards

Bloodiest: again probably your own country. If you used all the military to seize it there'd be no-one left to defend the civilians. and a war against a defenceless nation would be a bloody one (for them)

Longest: probably your own country. after all when would you distingiush when you'd defeated yourself? it has the potential to last centuries

and most difficult: probably to invade your own country, after all who the hell in your government would clear you to start such an inavsion. EAsily the most beauracratically difficult invasion any day

 

[Twilight_guy]

Russia. Napoleon and Hitler both learned that the strongest weapons Russia has are walls of cannon fodder and winter. Russia's winter should be classified as a WMD for all the damage its done to invaders.

 

[Dan Steele]

Russia, just ask Napolean and Hitler. The instant the Russian winter kicks in, the enemy army is practicaly auto-fucked.

Then you have America and its isolation perk with the confidence a large army would probably be destroyed by America's ability to quickly mass produce and equip a massive army in a rather short ammount of time.

You have almost all asian countrys (China, Japan, Vietnam) Where the home guard is able to dig in and cause a long and frustrating gurilla war for years on end because of humid tempuratures, dense jungles, geographical superiority.

 

[park92]

i'm going to say the virgin islands because no one can find it on the map

 

[Grotch Willis]

Switzerland, All the non aerial entrances to that country are tunnels through mountains that are rigged to explode. Also, its legal for anyone to own assault rifles and the like. Also, all citizens of that country are required to take a firearms safety and maintenance course.

 

[KnowYourOnion]

If you've ever played a certain flash game you know this to be Madagascar...

Though in reality, I'd have to say Russia for most of the categories, since I don't think there's ever been a truly "successful" invasion, despite the constant attempts.

Apparently Madagascar is entirely populated by Superhumans almost entirely immune to worldly illnesses

OT: Russia, never fight with land armies in Asia to badly quote Monty

 

[uzo]

I think all Western nations have actually fallen a helluva long way since the Greatest Generation. We talk like we are our grandparents. I've got news for you - we ain't. I'd say pretty much ever Western nation, as it stands now, is best thought of as being France in early 1939. Full of that over-confident 'it could never happen here' false-sense-of-security. I think some of the Western, particularly the Anglo-descended ones (USA, Canada, Australia, and NZ), are kidding themselves.

I'm Australian - look around at the people you see everyday - they aren't fighters. The whine and complain about *everything*. These are not the kind of people I would expect to pull out an assault rifle, yell "Wolverines!!" and start blasting away at an approaching Hind. Hell the vast majority of Aussies wouldn't know how to fire *any* gun let alone *hit* anything.

Aussies have this silly image of themselves as rugged, manly types. If an army invaded, the majority of us would accept the surrender just as the French did. We simply aren't prepared, mentally or para-militarily.

 

[MorsePacific]

I'm tied between Russia and the US. Russia has some damn dangerous terrain to get through to hit any major cities. Just look at the Germans and Napoleon before them. Add on top of that a huge amount of territory and you have a country basically built to be sieged.

The US, on the other hand, is surrounded on damn near every side by water. Any invasion would have to be amphibious or come through Canada. The US owns a huge portion of North America as well, so it definitely has the "huge landmass" thing going on. Not to mention that almost any citizen with a gun would be ready to fight if it came down to it. Toss on some technical superiority and the war would get pretty bloody.

Anyway, it's one of those.

 

[L4Y Duke]

One guess. [http://www.badassoftheweek.com/australia.html]

 

[WolfThomas]

Australia would be very difficult even if we didn't fight back. The logistics are outstanding, you'd need troops in every city, army base and regional centre, they're too spread apart to just control a couple, then you need to supply those soldiers over vast distance and have all the rear end stuff going. Then the fact it all has to be brought by air or sea, which makes it even more dangerous and expensive depending on which country has to do it.

If we did fight back? While the army isn't large it's completelty motorised (bushmasters) and mechanized (ASLAVs), could carry the fight over a large amount of territory. The SASR could make life hell for the invaders behind their lines. The air force and navy (especially submarines) would make the initial invasion quite costly. Then there's assistance from New Zealand and hopefully the UK and US.

I'm Australian - look around at the people you see everyday - they aren't fighters. The whine and complain about *everything*. These are not the kind of people I would expect to pull out an assault rifle, yell "Wolverines!!" and start blasting away at an approaching Hind. Hell the vast majority of Aussies wouldn't know how to fire *any* gun let alone *hit* anything.

Aussies have this silly image of themselves as rugged, manly types. If an army invaded, the majority of us would accept the surrender just as the French did. We simply aren't prepared, mentally or para-militarily.

The ordinary citizens won't have to do anything, the logistics problem alone (mentioned above) would be enough.