Who HAVEN'T They Invaded?! Americans React To "Every Country England Has Invaded: Visualized"
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 03. 2023
- #americanreacts #britishhistory #englishhistory
Original Video: • Every Country England ...
FULL, UNCUT Reactions, Movies, and Exclusive Series on Patreon: / embracethesuck21
Intro/Outro Song: "Boh's & O's" by @SpencerJoyceMusic open.spotify.com/track/5KtOzM...
Sponsors/Affiliates:
@RouteOneApparel For all your Maryland apparel needs, use promo code "embracethesuck21" to get 15% off your order at Route One Apparel: routeoneapparel.com
@charcoalcoffeecompany Single-origin coffee roasted over wood fire for a unique, exquisite coffee experience. Only available in the UK. Visit www.charcoalcoffee.co.uk/ for more information.
Wanna send us something?
Embrace The Suck 21
P.O. Box 2246
Annapolis, MD, USA
21404
Subscribe to our other channels
Spencer's Music Channel: @SpencerJoyceMusic
Daniel's Personal Channel: @AriasandtheNATION
Spencer's Motorsports/Gaming Channel: @SpencerJoycesWorld
Daniel's Bedtime Stories Channel: @StoriestotheNation
Follow us on social media to influence our content:
/ embracethesuck21
/ embracethesuck21
/ embracesuck21
Listen to our podcast in audio form:
anchor.fm/embrace-the-suck-21
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS
I’m sure someone has mentioned it in comments, but to paraphrase, to Americans your Independence Day was THE defining moment of your history. To Britain it was a Tuesday
Hahaha brilliant and true
love it lol
Ahh brilliant 😂
Couldn't stop laughing, 🤣😭🤣😅😅😅👍
The replies are VERY British.
It started out as a pub crawl and got slightly out of hand.
Sorry about that everyone.
😄😄😄
I have an alternate theory: The England football team has in fact been playing international matches for many centuries. Every time the England team lost (which often happened!) the hooligan supporters beat the crap out of the local population and never got around to going home.
US National Anthem is based on a UK drinking song.
@@DerekDerekDerekDerekDerekDerek He's being ironic...
Tbh most of us ended up there from a bar crawl and woke up in basic training 🤣🤣
A big apology to all those countries we missed,,we were busy,but I'm sure we will get around to you in time ;)
🤣🤣🤣
I think there's 22 to go for the full set.
Lols😂!!!!!! Great comment! I fckn love these two!!!!👍
Don't feel bad about it I'm sure you'll find something interesting we can use eventually
Why would you apologise for past history
These countries where conquered by a greater nation tough
If you notice Brazil was never invaded it should be noted that the British Portuguese alliance is one of the oldest in the world
Britain did blockade Brazil for a time in an effort to stop slave traders but you are right. England has the oldest standing alliance with Portugal in the history of the planet.
@@Tolrem-uh2ee We were supposed to blockade it but with only 5 ships initially and increased to 10 later according to a documentary on slavery that I watched the other day so wasn't very effective
@@m4rkscott 'twas exactly effective enough to get them to ban slavery. Which was the objective.
Effective enough for Brazil to sue for peace
They are our oldest allies...went there on the Ark Royal on the way back from the gulf so there could be goodwill meetings
What Americans don't realise is that in 1776 they only fought off a small percentage of the British. Had the British sent the full navy it would have been a very different story. Let's not forget that the British were also fighting the French and the Spanish at the same time all over the globe
There's a reason why the Dutch backed the Americans...
and the Dutch
@@Hadewijch_ yes... they saw an opportunity
Yeah we had a bigger problem in Europe fighting Napoleon to give the yanks our full attention.
Plus they were British.
You have to understand our makeup, we are a genetic mixture of Ancient Britons( Celts, Picts), Romans, Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Normans. All of these were warriors, and mix them together, it may also explain why we like a drink or two.
Our arch enemies the French used to say, wherever we go in this world, wherever there is enough water to sail a ship, we are sure find the british there waiting for us!! 🇬🇧👍
I blame the Danes and the Norwegians, especially the Danes. When they came calling in England they rowed across the sea, found a handy river, and kept on going; that's how we learned to navigate. Then they "married" a few local girls and as a result a whole bunch of us - well, pretty much all of us - have Viking blood, and once that stuff gets into your veins all you can do is go wandering. However, if you live on a small island the only places you can wander to will be a) overseas and b) already occupied by other people, which poses a small problem until you point to the guns on your ships being larger than their pea-shooters; at that point they usually say "Oh, oops, please come in."
In fact, if you look at those maps again, you'll see that there are only a few large areas of the world we didn't get to. Firstly, as well as the Sahara and Saudi Arabia, there are other great deserts, like the Gobi. I think someone went for a daytrip once, realised there were no large rivers, and went home again. Same goes for the Atacama, where it never rains at all; if there's no rain there's no water, and if there's no water, bang goes having a cuppa. And secondly, we never went where the Portuguese were there already. The English/Portuguese alliance is the oldest and longest in the world so we didn't touch Brazil or the other, mainly small, areas they got to first. It's a global example of honour amongst thieves. 😁
Tru Say,Mi Bredda.
Tru Say. We are Warriors,Mi Bredrin. Zeeeennn
The saying used to go ' The Sun never sets on the British Empire' , because between the 18th and 20th centuries we had some land or countries under our control where ever the sun was at any time. At its peak, the British empire covered a quarter of the Earth's surface.
You missed the word sun 😉
@@redrock425 Did I ;) Thanks
This is technically still true, although now it’s because we have little islands everywhere rather than places like India and Canada.
'The Sun never sets on the British Empire, because even God doesn't trust us with the lights out' ... :- )
The sun never sets and the blood never dries
The Falklands were never invaded by the British, they were settled as empty islands!
To give you an idea of how ridiculous our influence has been:
There are currently 7.8 billion people in the world
2.6 billion of them live in the Commonwealth (ie nations that were once part of the British Empire), and that doesn't count the 400 million or so in the US, let alone the ones we invaded but never ruled in Europe.
So if we count the US, effectively 38% of the current population of the world live in countries that once had our King or Queen as head of state.
And you could fit the whole of Britain nearly four times into Texas.
Mind-blowing really.
No, Texas is 268k square miles, the UK is just under 100k square miles. So the UK would fit into Texas 2.6 times.
Yup, it's the largest group of Humans on the planet.
@@SgtSteel1 it's a shame we wasn't at the Alamo, it would have turned out different hombre!!! 😂 🇬🇧
@@SgtSteel1 - You must be fun at parties.
@@lotuselise4432 I am the life of the party
The search for tasty and spicy food is a great motivator. That's why we gave up so quickly in North America, the food is shite!🤣
You'll love the documentary done by Jeremy clarkson on how hard it is to get the Victoria cross
Not to mention the follow up about Operation Chariot.
Iv heard that soldiers who survive war don't even get awarded it as it's now given to soldiers who give their lives to save others
The greatest raid of all time by Jeremy clarkson is the greatest documentary I’ve seen
@Reece B that's incorrect
@@MrReeceBrennan yeah that’s wrong
This video gives a big clue why Britain didn't send reinforcements during the revolutionary war. Despite Americans believing that war was the most important war ever the British army had bigger fish to fry mainly a global conflict with the two largest empire's who were funding and training the ungrateful traitors who'd caused the war which necessitated a rise in trade tariffs.
As a British person, watching you guys react to this video fills me with shame. On behalf of all British people I whole heartily apologise for all the countries we missed :(
So close to having the full set.
Don't apologise for me mate ,I wasn't there, wasn't even born till 1961 and we have never colonised anyone jn my life time
@@maxmoore9955 READ IT PROPERLY................he is apologising for Countries we MISSED...............J O K E...
lol
@@maxmoore9955 well said.
It's so amazing when you consider how small the UK was
Is
Still is
The power of innovation in transport and warfare, good organisation, discipline. The same things that saw the Roman empire be so successful in its day.
that's why we're being destroyed now, revenge I suppose.
@@joycegibbs5267 Same goes for all of europe.
What can I say, us Brits have always liked a good foreign holiday. 😎😎
Hey guys I am a Royal Navy Veteran & come from a long line of Naval Veterans, it's in the family blood as way back when apparently we were descendants of the Vikings !
TBH we English had been invaded by the Romans & Vikings & didn't really like it that much, we fought back & eventually found we were actually pretty good at it, plus we obviously wanted to find Tea......
So we took the idea from both the Romans & Vikings that excellent shipbuilding was the way to go & luckily we had heck of a lot of Oak.
Then we thought about the Romans discipline & the Vikings aggression & went to work, worked out well for about a thousand years !
Obviously we had a massive Navy, very well built, extremely well armed & crewed plus the best rope & canvas etc, way better than the French or Spanish.
We also had the "Indiamen", the ships of the East & West India Company, these were heavily armed merchant ships that looked like Warships & often when taking over an island somewhere hot it was in fact an indiaman doing it for the Crown.
Either way it didn't make much difference to the locals !
The old joke is "if we saw someone in a skirt we shot him & nicked his country".
We missed a few obviously, there are many more countries we attacked at some point & I grew up in Singapore in the 60's when my father was Posted to HMS Terror, Singapore Naval Base was the size of Pearl Harbour back then !
Now it's your turn America, has been since 1956 really, long story, Suez etc, but the UK Military will ALWAYS stand shoulder to shoulder with the U.S.Military, whatever our idiotic politicians do or say !
Chin Up Chaps & check out the War Plan Red video & the time the U.K. Nuked the U.S.using Vulcan Bombers.......
From being basically barbarians on a tiny island at the edge of the world we didn't do so bad... Bit hard on the folk we gave a kicking to though
And hey guys, we won the final round 1812 etc. You lot sued for peace ☮️
Possibly the greatest understatement of all time lol
😂💯👍🏻
We might have been a bit hard on them at the start, but the countries we controlled or created are now among the richest on the globe.
Barbarians? No mate. Just No.
For Barbarians we didn't do too badly. So many countries have some form of Democracy for example. Shame we can't invade Russia now...
Invaded is a strong word. We like to think more of it as calling in for a cup of tea and staying for dinner :)
Quite a few of these are where we were invited in or where our assets of other territories were attacked or threatened first, or where we threw out other invaders. You could say we did a lot of this map by accident
it was not Britains fault that those nations didn't have a Flag ;)
Toxic britishness
@@jessesleight9631 nothing toxic about winning
Oh the irony...called to India for a cup of tea was it ..after going to Dinner in Ireland, starving 1million scattering another million to the 4 corners many dying on route in the coffin ships...easier then spending rest of lives in servitude ...than back to eat all of India's food too .killing many more millions ....what a fantastic people and soo proud of this..
You didn't really "kick our butts". Yes we were made to retreat but we were fighting on several fronts AND you had help from the French .(LaFayette all that lot)and some indigenous people (last of the Mohicans gives insight into that), and America (US) at that time was only the 13 colonies(mainly farmland and wide open spaces) it was nothing like the powerhouse America (US) is today.
Maybe if we had realised how powerful America (US) was to become we would have paid more attention.
the exact moment i hit dislike
Don't forget, the US sued for peace because they where worried the Brirish would take the US more seriously. Kicked our butt's??? That definitely didn't happen, that's what is taught in US schools
If we had known about the gold and the potential value of oil, it would have been a different story. No need for oil when there are no machines.
not just the French either, Spain and the Netherlands joined in a fair bit too, so basically they needed THREE other European powers to help them beat us...
@@DraconimLt they didnt beat us the army in america was needed in europe
Some we 'discovered' and were the first to colonise - like the USA and Canada, Australia and New Zealand, etc. You have to remember that at it's height the race to discover and control the world was between England (not a Union at the time), Spain, France, Portugal and the Netherlands. And what everyone conveniently forgets is (1) England was itself invaded many times before William the Conqueror in 1066, and (2) every country we colonised benefited from it and the majority were given independence when they asked for it - not all of course as you can testify to! BUT your Constitution and Bill of Rights was based on the English Magna Carta written in 1215!!! Do remind me guys, which country has the USA conquered single-handedly???? There has NEVER been another Empire that at one time controlled A QUARTER of the known world.
I'm sure the people in those areas didn't see it as an invasion
I realise you said England above, but it was the Scots who were the driving force of the Empire. You are banging on about Wiliam the conquerer, yet ignoring what made the Empire, what made the Empire was the modern creation of education which was in Scotland at the time. Take people like Thomas Blake Glover who created modern Japan. Scots and Scottish education and inventions made the Empire, not the English and william the conquerer ffs. That was 1000 years too late. 22 signatories to the declaration of independence were Scots and it was based on the declaration of Arbroath, not the Magna Carta
"(2) every country we colonised benefited from it "
What the fuck are you talking about? Yes, I'm sure they'll thank you for the genocide, slavery, theft and rape done in the name of British imperialism. You're no different to every other empire who defend their own despicable actions with nonsense.
"There has NEVER been another Empire that at one time controlled A QUARTER of the known world."
You say this with pride, instead of shame, which you should instead.
@@overthewebb Greg, the Scots have an 8% influence in British parliament. To suggest they were the driving force behind it or even had much of a say in it, is to declare your ignorance of politics and history.
LOOK at every country Scotland invaded prior to the creation of the union in 1707.
Now, look at every country that ENGLAND invaded prior to the creation of the union in 1707.
You'll find that it was always England, not Scotland, that had a thirst for empire building.
@@OneTrueScotsmanthey had the thirst but lacked the ability. They joined the English because they blew all their money on a failed empire
At its height in 1922, it was the largest empire the world had ever seen, covering around a quarter of Earth’s land surface and ruling over 458 million people.
You also need to bear in mind that in 1776, Britain was at war with France, Spain and on-and-off the Dutch AT THE SAME TIME. Without the MASSIVE assistance of the French, the US Revolutionary War would have been an easy win for the British Empire. Britain was simply spread too thinly and had to make some hard choices: fight the insurrection in the colonies or risk an invasion at home and the potential loss of very lucrative assets elsewhere in the empire. Based on the fact that following the decision to abandon the fight in the colonies, soundly defeating the French, Spanish AND Dutch, as well as pushing back an American invasion of Canada in 1815 (even burning down the Whitehouse and eating the US President's dinner at his own dining table) it seems like a pretty sound decision.
As for WHY, the best comment I've ever heard was: "Britain invaded the entire world in search of spices only to discover they didn't like any of them." :)
The story of TEA is actually REALLY fascinating and still a point of great consternation to the Chinese who consider what happened to be, essentially, corporate espionage. Look up the story of the Scottish botanist, Robert Fortune and how he essentially stole the secrets of cultivating tea from China.
While you are basically correct, I must note that the French officially declared war in 1779, though in truth had been _de facto_ heavily supportive of the American cause in a rather underhanded way for a while longer. Saratoga convinced them to get their hands and boots dirty themselves. They were nominally signatories of the Treaty of Paris 1763, in which France did cede many territories to Britain, in the defeat of France.
It was something which the French Monarchy was not very happy about to say the least. Ironically, King Louis XV was almost singularly disinterested in the Americas, as he and his wife were _far_ more interested and concerned with events on the mainland of continental Europe, especially to the East of France (where powerful enemies of the French were fighting them actively on different war fronts)
The British were clearly not on good terms with the French after such a massive scale of conflict that doubled British national debt during the Seven Years War. The absolute very last thing they wanted, was another globe-spanning war which required them to thinly spread their forces and spend exorbitant amounts of money to keep it going.
And yet, that is basically what happened, as the French (and Spanish) got heavily-involved. As you say, the Dutch, too (often overlooked or dismissed, though very easily one of the most powerful naval forces of the late 18th century; and while the British and Dutch did clash here and there, the majority of the problem the Dutch presented, was forcing Britain to allocate more ships and crews elsewhere, _in case_ the Dutch decided to be cheeky over here or over there etc)
Another very regularly overlooked faction fighting the British, were the Mysoreans of the Sultanate of Mysore. The fact that Tipu Sultan had at his disposal, something in the order of 50,000-60,000 warriors, pointed at British lines in what is now Southern India, is not exactly something which should be overlooked.
Nor the fact, that the French and British both had lots of native sepoys and both fought with naval elements in serious naval battles, just as they already had in India for years, in the again, largely forgotten Carnatic Wars. Un-ironically the last direct engagement/action of the timeline of the various interwoven conflicts, ending in 1783, was the Siege of Cuddalore. In what is now India.
This capped off the Second Anglo-Mysore War (as part of the various conflicts the British were engaged in simultaneously around the world) It was an inconclusive siege, largely because the news of the peace treaty and cessation of hostilities had been brought to light) only just arrived (the Treaty of Paris 1783, which was largely _unkind_ to the British at their expense, much the opposite of the Treaty of Paris 1763)
The Treaty of Aranjuez 1779 between France and Spain, planned for greater military cooperation between the two members of the House of Bourbon Dynasty, of Absolute Royalists; against Britain, having difficulties dealing with what was, in truth, a British affair of a British civil war. Royalist France and Spain gave not one hoot about American 'liberty'. That was all just a crock of BS. They really just wanted revenge, pure and simple. And all else was vanity and lies.
The very fact that Royalist France directly became bankrupted in that exertion and ordeal, for the sake of getting their own back against Britain, should show us all just how spiteful the French Monarchy truly was. It would basically begin the countdown to it's own destruction out of it's own venomous hatred for the British - and ironically enough, the French people themselves would rise up and destroy the French Monarchy a decade or so after the American War of Independence. Kind of a gigantic backfire.
Sure, plenty of French people were already sick of their corrupt system and horrible absolute monarchy, though there were _plenty more_ totally loyal to that faction, never forget that. It will often be downplayed now with some classic, salty French historical revisionism sprinkled on it, though in truth, a huge number of French loyalists would have been around during the American War of Independence. Lafayette may not have been so inclined, true enough, though he was a young lad and looked up to George Washington (a literal former British officer) as a father figure. It went far beyond just a matter of being inspired by his colleague. It was like he was the son Washington never had, in no uncertain terms.
French Royalist propaganda against the British was, like the Spanish equivalent, so intense in that time, that it persisted even beyond the destruction of the French monarchy itself. The French Revolutionaries and Republicans were more than happy to continue their toxic hostility towards the British. Again, the British will often get blamed for that (just a form of historical gaslighting that goes on constantly it really is mental) as though the French were innocent cherubs with absolutely nothing wrong with their own attitudes to the British.
The French had been rivals with the English for centuries, and then, as now, it was common to default to Anglophobia. For instance, if a French President is about to go into an election campaign season, he'll typically leave the French capital and tour coastal towns and drum up anti-British rhetoric about fishing rights (even though French ships have literally been given _far_ too much leeway in British territorial waters, by EU policies in the recent past, and allowed to basically - in my view, F the EU - steal British fish stocks and scallops too btw) France even threatened to sadistically cut off Jersey's power supplies over this issue. France can often resort to just wheeling out the Anglophobic political diatribe if they think it will win votes - then guess what the President or other senior politician does?
They return to Paris, continuing to pretend they care about the French fishermen after riling them up to win their votes. Classic French political behaviour. And that is _modern France_ of the Fifth French Republic (yes, their fifth) and modern France of NATO membership, fellow founding member of NATO status, allegedly allied, Entente Cordiale historically allied France. Now imagine what Royalist France was saying about the British (and sure, we gave it _right back_ for sure, as so we should have in my view)
What is often forgotten is that the French were on the cusp of trying to strong-arm half of Europe in the time of Louis XIV 'the Sun King', and persistent resilience and defiance by England/Britain, put a huge dampener on the ferocity of France expansionism in the early 18th century. The likes of the 1st Duke of Marlborough, John Churchill (Winston's ancestor), denied the French full-hegemonic dominion of Europe, and defended the members of the Grand Alliance against the French Royalists and their allies.
The French had great generals and so did England and it's allies. There were many severely overlooked and oft now forgotten battles, which made sure France's power was checked on the mainland. And naturally, the French never really forgave us for it. Point being, that England/Britain went from a popular hero of Europe standing up to the big bully, France, and helping many allies, to being painted as a villain by France (successfully) for decades, with French hypocrisy hitting as yet unseen levels.
Then, by the Napoleonic Wars, Britain was the hero again bankrolling begging European factions desperate for capital to stay in the fight. Britain was the provider. Britain was grand-daddy lend lease in the Napoleonic Wars and Coalitions. Yes, the coalitions kept failing (5 out of 7 times) though it was British investment - again basically doubling British national debt at that time, on top of already high national debt because of numerous other wars - but the end result was to defeat Napoleon (twice, strategically in the last two coalitions) and to stop that iteration of a highly autocratic and tyrannical France. Revisionists and Napoleon lovers are basically determined to try and pretend he wasn't as bad as 'British propaganda said', but then they go quiet when you mention how Napoleonic Paris went from having ~64 newspapers to 4 regime controlled ones. Funny that, eh?
Britain was routinely going to get vilified by first France, then Russia, then Germany. To the point that by the Boer Wars, the French and Germans twisted a lot of public opinion against Britain on the continent, calling the British 'brutes'. Sound familiar? Sound a bit like the Franco-German narratives coming out of the EU against Brexit Britain? Well that is because they are familiar for a good reason; because the very same Anglophobia has been entrenched in Europe for centuries but nobody can usually be bothered to acknowledge it. It's apparently 'alright if they do it'.
P.S - The USA technically invaded Canada 10 times in that war, across 3 years of campaigns, in three main campaign seasons. All failed. Largely due to British allies like the Canadiens/Canadians (depending on whether Francophone or Anglophone) and the First Nations League of Tribes like the Iroquois. Britain had
The British Empire evolved out of the need to Trade, and to protect that Trade from rivals: the Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, Belgiums, and French.
Unlike some of those other empires, it was not created for reasons of national prestige or race supremacy. It was sole and simply, an Empire of Trade, in goods and services.
It created the Global Economic Stem we have today in the world, and the major institution which support it.
This is why the English language in the international language, of business, science, communications, and maritime law.
Having over centuries established all of these Trading Relationship, this is also the reason why the UK was able to give up the British Empire, and convert it to the Commonwealth of Nations. Maintaining those relationships, to this day.
Other empires, build instead on national prestige or race supremacy (like the Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, Belgiums, and French), have been unsuccessful in doing the same. The majority of them have very bad relationships with their former colonies.
Let’s get to the real reason we invaded so many countries, they knew that brits would love to go on holiday to all parts of the world in the 20th century so they made sure we didn’t have to learn another language 😂😂😂😂😂
Quite right. Gibraltar was originally planned to be a layover stop for drunk teens heading for Spanish beaches. (Not a lot of people know that).
Have you been to America? Lol
@@101steel4 been many times to USA, the trouble with America is they think they speak English 😂😂😂😂😂
@@jimwalker1404 exactly 😁
In the words of Al Murray it was the search for hot and spicy food and Olympic quality athletes.
The Greatest Raid of All,the one with Clarkson is a great visual and representation of what happened
Another good one RAF quick alert reaction for modern time
yeah that's a good watch,when he goes up in the plane and the jets arrive either side,tad bit scary to see that at the end of your wings haha
At least with us Brits,Colonisation = civilisation.
I'm from Northern Ireland and if you know you know, how staunch and proudly British we are over here, it's the place in the UK where you'll see the Union Flag decorating most streets all year round and especially over the 12th July Celebrations, but not to burst the British bubble as I'm a Protestant and very much British I have to agree with a statement I heard the other day and I paraphrase; 'that the Roman Empire came to an end when they sat back and revelled in the spoils of their conquests and glories' and sad to say, to a certain extent we're looking back on a Britain that was in better times globally; as the state Britain is in today, especially England, This Empire is at its end and this country is being invaded by a certain "religion of peace" as we speak.
Deny it all you want but thee enemy is within Our proud shores!
Watch the Collapse of the Roman Empire. Our Government is the prime example that's pretty similar to that of Roman times, divided and has lost the public's support!
if you are a student of the British Empire, particularly in India, you can see strong parallels with the administration of the roman empire. We could have kept the empire but it would have taken brutal repression that emperors of the past would have taken as normal business as usual. Universal suffrage in the UK, strong protestantism and the printed press made this impossible. At one point consideration had been made to create in effect a single state by democracising the whole empire. This could have been monumental but the problem with this was firstly the UK would have ended up with minority representation. Secondly it was deemed unworkable due to recognition of massive corruption and tribalism that would undermine democracy, (- born out by looking at what has happeend to a lot of these countries post independance). Thirdly, the economy would have been unbalanced and unworkable, Britain had developed into the workshop of the world due to the industrial revolution and the empires economic purpose was to provide the resources in return for the products. If a majority were resource providers they may see little need in restricting supplies to the UK. The pupose of the empire if one was decided on was the protection of trade and supplies of resoures via military means. In todays global market, military means are only required to resolve temporary upsets
What is the "religion of peace"?
@@jessesleight9631 its a myth it doesnt exist
Wow arrogance and ignorance...living in the Island ..with your flags and bunting ...and matching
@@ko0974 I'm no flag waving little Englander but i see it as all too easy for people that never actually looked in detail at what they are talking about in context of the times to join a bandwagon slinging mud because some lobby groups working for foreign powers are rewriting our history unchallenged.
We couldn't defeat Nepal. They are true warriors who have immense discipline and courage. The terrain didn't make it any easier. We now have the honour to serve alongside these famous warriors AKA the Gurkhas. In the words of Al Murray, becoming an Allie counts as losing to us 😂 we always win in the end.
We DID defeat the Gurkhas - that's how they became part of the British Army after the Anglo-Nepalese War. The war was not over Nepal, however, it was over a region of India controlled by Nepal.
@@Kestrel1971 So as I said, we didn't defeat Nepal. The region you speak of was controlled and ceded by Nepal at the end of the war.
It's the altitude, we're much better fighting at sea level.
On a huge ship covered in guns preferably.
Talking about the Sahara, the SAS special forces unit which first came about in 1941, were initially based in North Africa and with the help of the LRDG (long range desert group) ran lots of covert missions behind enemy lines throughout the whole Sahara region during WWII, sabotaging airfields and such, there's actually an amazing tv series all about it called 'Rogue Warriors', which I'd love to see you react to one day.
The brains and brawn of SAS were Irish
@@ko0974 The SAS was set up by the Scottish David Stirling before Paddy Mayne took over after Stirling was captured and became a pow.
Makes it even more impressive when you consider how small England is.
Who was invaded by even smaller Denmark. At least twice, counting the major ones.
@@herrbonk3635 Wasn't just Denmark, get your facts right first.
@@cpj93070 Both the Jutes (that gave name to today's Jylland) and the Angles came from Denmark. The Saxons that also invaded the Britons lived just south of these tribes.
@@herrbonk3635 Northern Germany get it right, we ain't Danes so don't try and take any credit that Brits are Danish.
@@cpj93070 Credit? The English (not British) *are* indeed Danish, to a very high degree. This is not only due to these migrations but also to the Danelaw some 400 years later. The Danes invaded the British isles pretty independently of any other tribes in both the 400s and 700/800s.
We were on the hunt for hot and spicy foods, and Olympic quality athletes, it’s why we were never interested in the moon, plus there was no one to give it back too once we’re done with it! 😉
Beat me to it !
Worth pointing out Gibraltar is a complex case. It was ceded voluntarily to the UK in 1713, as part of a wider treaty. It's quite an interesting subject actually.
It was just a world tour!!in the Sixties we sent the Beatles.👍🇬🇧😊
All Germanic languages spell Irak rather than Iraq. English is the only one that spells the name with a q. And I am pretty sure that in British English Irak is a valid alternative for Iraq. This is probably where the “mistake” on the map comes from.
They also spelled eye ran wrong.
@@paulmidsussex3409 🤣🤣🤣
Like WasSington and NicaraguE....lol
I'm seeing IRAK used more and more these days, even on maps on the news
The British ended slavery?? Fact ,
The link : the British crusade against slavery.
Yeah after benefitting from it for 200+ years- it's like a rapist wanting credit when they stop the attack and tell their mates to stop now.
@@7lillie no the British just went along with something that was intrenched from the beginning of time, but when they understood it made the world stop the hole world if it was not for the British slavery would still be going on, now its only in black African country's and Arab Muslim ones, yet we are blamed for the start the middle and then end, every one in every country benefited from it yet its only we that are blamed from befitting yet it was the British that sent its navy spent trillion apon trillions in ending it, we in the uk did not Finnish paying for the slave we we freed untill 2015. Yet slavery was there before us by thousands of years even you Americans did not stop it till we made you 200 years after we had ended it as for country out the uk took longer but if you take just two mins to watch it you will see we were fighting wars in eroup napoleon. Many white British men died freeing the black man from slavery did we take part yes for maybe a few years but not the two hundred the British colonys may have for two hundred but they are not British ruled by us yes, but they are not British, are we responsible for American slavery ? Even when we told you to stop you did not own it it was you not the British.
In empire building, transport and communication links are key. The Romans had their roads, the Incas had their relay runners, the Mongols had their horses, the British had their ships. The reason why the ships were fast was because of the invention of the accurate marine chronometer or "watch", by John Harrison in 1761.
This (finally) allowed accurate, arbitrary navigation, allowing ships to accurately follow great circle routes across oceans instead of having to hug coast lines, or sail tentatively along lines of latitude, etc. It also coincided with the size of ships getting big enough to "routinely" take on oceans. This above all else meant that the Royal Navy and the armed forces it could transport could turn up out of the blue far earlier than anyone else's navy. It also meant that British merchant shipping was quicker too, which boosted the strength of doing trade with the British (money flowed faster, people got rich quicker).
Another key thing was an early adoption of undersea telegraphy cables. From the 1850's onwards, a "help!" message could be sent to London in seconds. Which, when you think about it, must have been pretty awesome in its day. Even if the telegraph was shut off, that was a cue for "something's up". By WW1 large chunks of the world were connected by telegraph, and Morse radio was in use. The first thing the British did at the outbreak of the war was to cut Germany's cables, which meant it lost contact with its colonies overseas immediately.
To give it perspective (thank you Wikipedia), by 1896 24 of the world's 30 cable laying ships were British. Looking at the map of 1902,1903 of the Eastern Telegraph Company's cables, there were multiple redundant routes from London to pretty much everywhere. If necessary, a message could be got from London to, say, Auckland in just a few minutes. We've not substantially improved on that since.
There is an historic quote that reads 'The empire on which the sun never sets'.
The British empire spanned the globe. This led to the saying that the sun never set on it, since it was always daytime somewhere in the empire. There was a brief moment in time when the sun was always in the sky under British rule.
Disappointed we didn't collect the full set. 😪
As an Englishman i found this vid very interesting, It helps me realise why some peoples of the world don't like the English.
As a London taxi driver I have also had many foreign passengers tell me how much they love London for its history and historic buildings along with the many Castles (Northumbria has the most apparently)and ancient Churches some going back a thousand years or more. I also enjoy Vlogs by various foreigners who have travelled the UK and videod their travels highlighting a number of beautiful locations that i will now visit myself. Good work guys.
It’s great to know we successfully invaded your channel 😜
You never got your independent not with out help from the Spanish and French and if they was not there then it might off been a different story great reaction lads 🇬🇧🇺🇲👍
My father had always referred to the US revolutionary war as a 'family argument' and couldn't understand why a family fight should be celebrated every year by one of the sides...lol...Incidentally I stumbled on George Washingtons great great grandfathers grave (Lawrence Washington) at the Great Brington church recently which is also the estate church to the Spencer family and where a number of the Spencers are buried including Diana Spencers (Lady Diana) father...Sorry for the digression...
People are jealous and bitter because they couldn't have an empire as big. Even though some have tried.
He leaves out a few times when we threw our weight around without actually invading somewhere. For example he didn’t mention Greece, even though during the Don Pacifico affair we blockaded Athens for 2 months and seized the entire Greek navy until they agreed to pay some money to this guy Don Pacifico - he was a private citizen and wasn’t even from the UK, but he’d been born in Gibraltar, so when the Greek government owed him some money we literally took their navy and blockaded their capital until they paid him. That wasn’t technically an “invasion” though.
Greece was mentiomed
@@marksavage1108ah fair enough, you’re right, rewatching I see he briefly mentions the UK owning a couple of outlying islands for a short time, without colouring Greece or adding a flag.
If u go to Malta or Cyprus you find numerous little museums containing British world war II relics. They helped greatly in WW2 and we looked after them
Don't forget, we got bullied and invaded a lot before all that, not to mention all the infighting before we got organised
There is a famous saying, The sun never sets on the British Empire. At one point we literally had control of a country in every time zone on the planet.
Technically it still doesn't 😏
It is a source of pride as a British person that we ruled over this many!
The whole world was doing the same thing and Britain was just the best doing it 💯
The world wouldnt be the way it is now without it.
I honestly thought you'd done this one years ago!! The end comment of 65 different independence days kinds of puts into perspective why we aren't so bothered when the US mentions it to us. Great reaction chaps
That and also because we were constantly fighting the French during that period including Napoleon. Hardly a head-to-head battle, they picked a good time to go about it though.
In terms of total map control at one given time, the absolute height would have been near the end of the Victorian Era when the United Kingdom controlled somewhere between 1/4 to 1/3 of the entire globe in one capacity or another
There are a few countries that we virtually owned via UK companies and banks making loans and investments, so not included here. The mention of british invasions of other countries to recover debt aludes to this. The ones where we didnt need to do this are not mentioned in the video. I think a biggy was Argentina. I suppose if it did, you could probably, on this basis, show a lot of the West and Africa as being owned by China. Our claim in Antarctica is also not mentioned.
For 'United Kingdom' see England. The "Irish" parliament that signed the Act of Union was open only to Anglican males, so only Anglican males qualified to be an MP and only Anglican males at this time qualified to vote. If you weren't Anglican, you didn't count. Kind of like how the Catholic Church is said to have replaced the Roman Empire I suppose. Empire's a brutal thing, look at Russia.
It's practice in England not to teach of their own historic brutalities, which has the effect that you don't fully understand the animosities of those on the receiving end. On the opposite side of that, schools in Northern Ireland do not teach much Irish history for fear of influencing extremism. What people do learn, they learn at home. We can read about what really caused the famine or the scorched earth tactics used in the 1640s and how that affected remote homesteads but, luckily for stability, most people have no interest in that.
@Theotherside Does territorial claim in Antarctica amount to anything? That's not a jibe, but an honest question.
@@Al_Ellisande Yes empire is a brutal thing, I don't disagree with anything in particular but brutality was not because of empire, its just the way ordinary people were treated by default then. With reference to Ireland, the catholic church was always promoting revolt, King James had actively promoted Irish officers to undermine Protestant govt so catholic dis-enfranchisement was the only solution that would create a loyal working govt. It didn't really disadvantage as many Catholics with ambition that would have been held back just changed religion to suit Indians will point to the massacre at Amritsar but this was due to an arrogant act of an individual not empire policy. This would happen and will continue to happen under any rule. Similar act happened at Peterloo but no-one would blame Empire. The Irish famine is an easy mark for Irish Nationalists to pin a flag to but at the same time a million English died of starvation every year probably also due to the corn laws but it is not paraded as an act of empire. Massacres and famines have always happened and continued to happen after independence
@@redf7209 I'm not getting into a tit-for-tat argument, that's not what this is about. However, to address the gaps in what is taught: the Irish famine came about during a time of large abundances of food-produce creating vast amounts of wealth for the land-owners, many of whom resided in England. Yet the people who actually farmed the land were dependent on one single crop - which itself originated in the Americas. There are questions here you don't have the answers to because you're not taught that those questions are there to be answered. This is all I'm saying.
"This is the way things were done" and "it was a natural phenomenon" are absolute certainties created to maintain a source of national pride rather than to allow questioning and a possible crumbling of said national pride.
@@Al_Ellisande In Engalnd the famine is not taught in any real detail. And I've never relied on what i was taught. The English corn laws guaranteed the price of corn - as you say making the farmers rich. It was grown in England and ireland but the populace in ireland ate potatoes because it was not price controlled. It was unlucky that the weather and blight hit the potatoes. In England the poor suffered and starved too but because of the price of corn being fixed, it lasted over a longer period and gave rise to the anti-cornlaw movement and eventually trade unionism. Irish are not taught this either. Modern economists have argued against providing food aid to famine hit areas because cheap or free food means farmers will not invest in food crops in those areas and prevent the next famine. Right or wrong, this is not very different from what he english government was saying in the 1840s iro irish famine releif. The English government was used to Ireland 'crying wolf' and saw the irish problem as nothing different from the problems of the English population but exagerated. There was little media in those days to correct that point of view convincingly. if it wasnt for the irish diaspora and modern irish nationalism, the famine would have been forgotten about, its just a tool for irish nationalism to throw at the English.
The Sun never sets on the British Empire, because God didn't trust us in the dark!
yep, we picked on the French a lot. It's the naval history side of things when the Royal Navy start getting stuck in where it gets a little amusing. The running joke was that the French Naval dockyards may as well have worked for the British as the Royal Navy kept nicking the French ships. We even had an Enterprise before USN even existed and we nicked it from the French too 😂
The main thing that allowed the British Empire to grow to such a size and then maintain it was the Royal Navy and the merchant fleet. The British Empire also had a habit of building infrastructure everywhere they went in order to make the flow of trade and commerce much more efficient. It was however the size and expense of the British Empire that brought Britain to the brink of bankruptcy after WW1 but even at the start of WW2 the Royal Navy was STILL the largest navy on the planet. It took the industrial might of a really pissed off USA to finally overtake the Royal Navy in number of hulls during WW2 to take that top spot.
We've run out of new places to invade and will be revisiting a few old faves.
Please tidy your porches and await the arrival of our scarlet tunic'd representatives.
We were only calling by for a cuppa tea
England also had been invaded so many times in the past and its that reason that we now have the English language we have today.
I'm a Brit but the people that did this were as much our ancestors as they were many Americans.
I'm a Brit, so I understand that we're awesome yeah? And that video you're reacting too is STILL mind boggling!
Americans are so obsessed defining the UK by empire (which British people actually don't do), which is why they endlessly request videos like this. And of course they always reduce the UK to England as well, confusing the terms English and British.
And they never look at how many countries the US has had troops in, including right at this moment. And that's in the very short history that they define themselves by.
The US actually defines itself by military might now way way more than the UK does. And they think other places must be like them.
You have to remember with the early dates such as Irelands 1169 that England itself was not very old. England, Britain and the UK exist as an accumulation of amalgamated kingdoms and lands. Ireland and the parts of France were therefore not very different from any other parts of the UK or channel Islands today. Nationalism didnt really exist as we know it now. It was simply about the allegiance of local lords to kings and boundaries existed to define jurisdiction. It was a feudal system and ordinary people only cared about the lord they were bound to who probably helds lands in diverse areas of Britain. DIvisions with Ireland were really only seeded with the division of religeon started wih Henry V111 and exacerbated by Cromwells invasion to stop Royalists using Irish troops. After that date catholics were restricted in civil rights throughout the empire due to the instruction from the pope /catholic church to undermine protestant rule. Even so, the rebellion in 1916 was not supported by the irish population until the leaders were executed. This video also has a number of faults and omissions
Jeremy Clarkson..How hard it is to win the VC
You MUST watch this..its an outstanding piece of television and history!
Being a Brit I would just like to piont out the there are 22 countries we have not invaded .......YET!
As a Dane, they may have used their Navy to do a drive by on our capital when Napoleon was doing his thing but I think it's fair to say that taking over their country, enabling their only King to be given the moniker 'Great', naming hundreds of places and adding a ton of words to their language - we came out on top in terms of who kicked whose ass in terms of history. Angles, Jutes, Danes (formed of the Angles and Jutes in the following era) and Normans (Danes that'd conquered northern France) all dipped their wick in the British rose and had a lasting influence. Albeit we know our place now lol.
Edit: Britain Vs France - imagine if Russia and the United States only had 20 miles of water between them, press play..
We would happily have accepted your words without the invasion. Borrowing words is what we do best, that's why we have at least five words for everything and the full dictionary takes up a whole shelf.
@@radman8321 fair fair. Sadly Dk is pretty much a sandbank. We were mostly farmers. England was like the promised land for those second and third sons that weren't getting the family farm. And come on, without the invasion there wouldn't be places with names like Cleethorpes, Grimsby or.. mm yeh like I said, fair fair..
We only wanted to stop the French getting their hands on your navy. We asked you to surrender it to british custody temporarily. You refused, Npoleon was coming for it, so we had to forcibly remove it. Because it became a fight, the ships were taken as prizes and you never got them back and Copenhagen was partly destroyed. Should have just let us look after them for a couple of years. Same thing happened to the French in WW2. We had to sink some of their ships because Hitler wanted them and the French refused to let us keep them safe.
Danish DNA is very strong in my wife's and my family ranging from 23% to 38%, so they definitely dipped their wick in the UK. Maybe we should blame the Danes for it all.
Britain has never been invaded since 1066!!! The days of the Viking raiding parties were over!! 🇬🇧
The bit i find funny when i spoke to an american couple. One said are you celebrating independence day…my response which one? Theres one every 7 days
For a geographically 'small' country, we play a great game of Risk!
We also have great administrators and a working class that are always up for a good scrap!😅
We invaded the world looking for spices but flatly refused to use any of them.
Did we not use them to clean stuff instead?
I can see many people commenting the same thing, but please react to the greatest raid of all time. Shows you the British moral and why they could achieve things like this
It should be pointed out this wasn't countries England invaded, it is countries Britian invaded. Scots had a huge influence on this also. The British Empire had 1/4 of the world's land mass and people under its control at its peak. It's the largest Empire the world has ever known
You have to remember there was no telly in those days, it was something to do I suppose... :D
Irak. Original British spelling!
Well, it's not entirely true, 1776 independence was won by the French, Spanish and Dutch. Lol.
But you can take Credit if you want too looool
Thanks lads! Really enjoyed this! I am loving that background music….. sounds like something from one of me favourite films Gladiator. Anybody know what this actual piece is called? Very Hans Zimmer! Anyway hope you both have a lovely weekend, your cousin from Manchester in England…..Julie x
We went around the world saying "Do you have a flag?" If they didn't, we claimed that country. Simple.
irak is the original spelling
From Dutch Irak, from Arabic الْعِرَاق (al-ʕirāq, “Iraq”), of uncertain derivation. Medieval Arabic uses 'Iraq' as a geographical term for the area in the south and center of the modern Iraq.
Iraq with a Q is the english version
It’s in our blood. Britain has Roman vikings Norman’s and Saxons . Warrior nation lads 👍
Norman/Flemish
Normans in the south, flemish in the north
You didn’t kick our butt The revolutionary war was in effect a civil war one of your generals came from a couple of miles away from where I live!Great channel by the way
Basically if your near any water you got a visit, Rule Britannia 🇬🇧
To be slightly fair, that's just how countries were hundreds of years ago; constantly invading each other and trying to get a piece of each other's pie. There's a reason kings and queens and emperors have gone out of fashion.
Yeah we never gave Gibraltar back lol finders keepers shut up(j,Acaster) 😂
The spelling IRAK was used between 1808 to 1948
Quick note while the English speaking world Spells Iraq with a Q the People of iraq when using our alphabet use Irak, The Spanish also spell it as Irak
It's worth mentioning that a lot of these places were lawless third-world poverty stricken countries that were raised up to modern (for the time) standards and made wealthy. It's also worth mentioning that a lot of these places have descended back to lawlessness and poverty and brought back slavery and the like since 'winning' their freedom. This comment will attract some hate but the truth is often painful.
I worked with a (then) Rhodesian Woman in the Late 1980's just b4 it was about to become Zimbabwe and she told me that Country would collapse from being "The Bread Basket Of Africa" and it did under Robert Mugabe...
I'm sure they'll thank you for invading, colonising, raping their lands of resources, for your empire building then, Ian. Because in your view they were inferior and needed "teaching a lesson".
@@OneTrueScotsman What a weird thought, you should keep your dark inner beliefs to yourself.
I remember there was one instance where google maps actually almost caused a war, I can’t remember where exactly but what happened was that there was a slight error, where the boarder between two countries which was already hotly contested ended up being moved slightly to the right leading to a country with about an extra mile of new territory, according to google maps and so thankfully the error was corrected, but imagine that going to war just because one guy from google maps failed at their job😂
We won the game of Empires in a time of Empires. We were playing a giant game of Risk.
The Falkland islands wouldnt be included in this list as they are a British territory, we got invaded in that war not the other way round, we also never took it to Argentinian soil so it definitely wouldnt be included as an invasion
Makes me proud to be English
Me too. And I'll never apologise. 👍👍
Name a War you've Won without us since your Independence...
To save you time, the answer is 0 😉
Next question re those brave colonists 'kicking our butts' all by themselves... ever wondered why pretty much every town in the US has a street named Lafayette? 😉😋
Spain 1898 springs to mind.
@@chrismackett9044 Touché 🤣
I stand corrected. Apart from that one in a Quarter Millenium though? 😉
Good video. You can see why in WWII, even though Britain stood alone for the first 2 or 3 years and stopped the German invasion in 1940, British military resourses were so stretched because we still had an empire to run and protect, many of those territories in crucially strategic points around the world.
Even though Britain, America and our allies were victorious, Britain had spend over 1/4 of its entire wealth to win the war.
By the 1950s Britain was then a large medium power, but America by that point had taken the crown as the #1 superpower. And the world's hierarchical structure will change again... it always has.
We ran India with two men on a bike
~Al Murray
I maintain that the British Empire was overall a force for good in the world, the existence of which resulted in net improvements for the standard of living for the average person within its territory. I mean don't get me wrong, we did some horrible things, but nothing beyond what many colonial powers did, and often were far more lenient. Add to that Britain's leading role in ending the transatlantic slave trade, the introduction of modern medicine, science, sanitation, education and agricultural methods, the building of lasting engineering projects such as roads, railways and bridges designed to improve the standard of living across the whole empire and the banning of suttee in India, a practice where widows were burned alive.
Overall I think it was a net positive.
many of those horrible things we did to our own in England too or were acts of individuals not empire policy, in context just a feature of the times. The original rulers of many of these places were despotic and warmongers. in many places the rule of law implemented was known as the 'Pax Britannica' and relied upon by many peoples and tribes for protection from neighbours. We provided an international market for the goods and resources of these nations that did not exist before and we invested in the extraction of the resources creating much employment.
I'm sure those that England invaded, stole from, colonized, butchered, would thank you too. "more lenient" This tells me you haven't read a lot on the sort of violence the Brits inflicted on the various lands they "visited". And you mention ending the slave trade (not true) Other countries had abolished it before Britain. And Britain had benefited from it for centuries, but yes pat yourselves on the back for eventually stopping doing it. And the rest of the things you listed science, medicine, sanitation, agriculture, etc, were European innovations, not British. And then you mention India, where until Britain invaded, didn't have a death penalty for homosexuals. But you want to focus on the widow burning. I wonder why.
@@redf7209 "The original rulers of many of these places were despotic and warmongers."
Even if that were true, it doesn't excuse not explain Britain's empire. "Oi George! Seen how Jonny foreigner treats his population? Oh I say ol' chap, we need to go over and do something!"
Yeah, it didn't happen like that. Invading other peoples lands and stealing their minerals and gems, taking them as slaves, and forcing YOUR morals on to them, is inexcusable. It's not your place to do so, any more than a radical Islamist with their own view of morality has any right to invade and colonise western societies to impose their ways on us.
I don't give a fuck what reason you think you have, there's no excuse for invading other people's countries, violently, and taking their shit and forcing your own ethics on them, if you even let them live.
@@OneTrueScotsman that's a racist generalist statement. Its easy to sling mud about us stealing gems and minerals without evidence. The British empire was based on trade. A lot of resources were in the ground and only retrieved and valuable because the British had use for them. Acquisition of resources was no different from a British mining company opening a copper mine in somewhere today creating new industry, lots of jobs and wealth.. Most of the wars were about protecting its trading rights and investments. The British were a major force in outlawing the global slave trade that had always existed. The presence of a British rule was a major advantage to many populations to stop them being preyed on by neighbours or other religions. In most of the countries we allowed local self rule that was far more benign than the tyrants they had before. Trade restrictions and relations controls that we imposed were not very different from the principles of the EU today. India teaches its kids that we ruined it economy because it wants to distract from its own more recent failings. It says its previous balance of payments ( based on silver and gem exports ) crashed. In fact its economy soared from British investment but exports to nations within the empire were simply not classed as exports so appeared to fall. Profits from diamonds crashed because of the discovery of diamond fields in Africa. Silver profits crashed because a cheap chemical way of smelting silver from lower quality ore was discovered in England that created a silver glut.
The irony is that England was initially not much more than farmers who ended up being invaded by EVERYONE including the Saxons,the Romans , the Vikings, Germanic tribes, the French, The Dutch etc etc
Hey! You litteraly invited us Dutchies to invade you, remember?
The woke brigade will probably say those white (therefore privileged) peasant farmers deserved it!
Where do you think we got the "invader" DNA from? 😉 With that lot in the mix it's no wonder we did so well, bred for it!
@@redrock425 Tru Say,Mi Bredda. Preach those words,mi bredrin..
The REAL reason for giving up the USA...there was only so long we could put up with biscuits being called "Cookies", and Jam "Jelly".
Nah....it was when they tried to tell us grits was food!!!.😉
For ‘visualising’ how much Britain had on its plate (to answer your query), for a while 1 in 4 people across the entire globe was under British rule. Yep, that’s pretty mind-boggling.
you need to watch this one [When Britain Nuked America....Twice]
And probably a couple of videos of Vulcans howling and rolling all over the damn place to supplement that. Amazing aircraft.
In a game of RISK the British WIN
I offer no apologies. The sun never set on the British Empire. Britain gave much more than it took, including the rule of law, the end to slavery and the industrial revolution which began the road to the technologies we take for granted.
1922 is the year you are looking for. It's the year we held the most at anyone time. Generally when you type in British empire the red map you get is pretty much the 1922 one. Pinning the dates and times to see a moving picture is extremely difficult/time consuming, it can be simplified that everything moved with the geopolitics of the time, for example the Napoleonic wars led to the invasion of French colonies, or the 100 years war led to invasions in France or the earlier ones mentioning belgium. The video is based off a book and the book itself is very tongue in cheek. Most eastern european countries would have union flags on them due to secret intelligence operations/infiltrations or bombing sorties. Also naval blockades are included. The video does simplify though Take Mexicofor instance, it was a tri-party exercise. France Spain and Britain invaded with troops together. France was the only one who stayed and tried to take it over once the debts were settled....Anyway there is fair reason for each one of these union flags being mentioned. They do most definitely constitute "getting all up in their business" where countries are not red. The united states most certainty has taken the baton now.
I’d love it if you could react to “Stuggy vines” Stuggy is from England and his vines are absolutely hilarious
Actually missed a few countries 😂
Some of those 'invasions' of France are a bit dubious. France in the 11th and 12th Century was made up of several kingdoms, only one of which was the Kingdom of France. England had itself been conquered by one of those kingdoms, Normandy and ended up as part of the Angevin Empire. Through marriage about half of what is now France ended up under the rule of the King. In some ways the French can be said to have invaded and conquered a lot of France as they slowly pushed back the borders of the Angevin Empire through a few centuries of various fights over territory and disputed claims of who was the rightful ruler of various parts of France until finally all of England's territory on the continent was under their control.
That said, it was a messy period of history. It's not a coincidence that GRR Martin looked to that period of time and the stories that came out of it when he was writing Game of Thrones. Lots of backstabbing and betrayals all round.
Yep, we had Gascony well into the 1200s, much to the King of France's displeasure. Edward I and Philip le Bel played cat and mouse over it.
Jeremy Clarkson`s docs..The Victoria Cross and also The Greatest Raid.
You won`t regret it.