Easiest (and Hardest) Countries to Take Over 

Amen. This is one of the reasons a huge military like China still needs to think twice about attempting to invade Taiwan, whose main island is extremely mountainous and 100km of open water off the coast of China. Necessary achievements like air superiority are essentially out of the question when your helicopters only have enough fuel for a one-way trip and have nowhere to land. That's assuming they make it across the strait to begin with. Their only shot is to throw the kitchen sink at them and hope for the best, but the losses they'd incur while doing so would be obscene.

Yea like Afghanistan

@@boring4975 and the USA, being atlest an ocean away from any real miltaristic threat on each side

So, let’s build a nation surrounded by ocean, no beaches but all high cliff sea walls, and a curved transparent roof covered in grease so any bombs or paratroopers just slide off it into the ocean.

@@OpinionatedZoomer69 *gets invaded by Canada*

Yeah except no one can get to malta with its position in the meditteranean except european powers, as the strait of bosporus and the strait of gibraltar are heavily guarded and cant fit a large navy. Europe and Turkey are all on good terms with malta, so its actually quite defended

Isn't it true that a lot of your military strength is used as symbolism and tradition? Been to Malta recently and went to your cannon museum and valetta, and the historian mentioned this.

My Country belize only has 1k soldiers. 0 tanks 1chopper with no weapons 1 small air craft with no weapons Only about 10 vehicles to transport soldiers and most of the time are In garages Coast guard with about 5speed boats lol that's it.

Oh and we have outdated m16s

@@losangeles9817 you have america, you’ll be fine

Just from the military equipment taken from Russia, Ukraine's military has tripled in size - which is even better than what they've managed to destroy.

Yall this was 5 months ago chill.

@@kylejay8493 VERY different levels of tech. Zero offense meant to Ukraine, but they are only still fighting because of Western equipment - and they still may lose. Russia always fights wars of attrition with heavy, heavy losses.

Exactly! Not only that, but the revelations of how poorly maintained their equipment is, they shouldn't have been this high anyway.

Definitely 🤣

Thanks for the list. The video felt like it jumped all over the place.

Tnkx

Thank you

@@cmplx6114 Yeah and Germany. Big cap.

That russia ranking has aged like fine milk lol

Idk when I trained with them in a joint operation in jrtc we gave them the easiest task and they got mass cassed, dropped the ball and put us a day behind on insert so we had to land many miles before our original insertion to the box and having to ruck much further through the woods, they got embarrassed, but could just be a fluke

Parakoopa

Meh.

Y'all ever dealt with the Army Ranger Wing (ARW) from Ireland?

You know there is a thing called the Marcos

in theory Vietnam and Afghanistan were easy too

Agree. I was expecting the same - mountains, lakes, rivers play a big role in the conflict. Examples are obvious - Vietnam, Afghanistan.

And that is the main reason why china is surpassing russia

So NSA who invented SHA? An algorithm we globally use for network security and Bitcoin?

@@printname3608 SHA is from the NIST,not the NSA. And thk god SHA1 isn t used for Bitcoin

@@dinamosflams lol no? It s even the other way around. China is behind in terms of cryptography, that s the reason they invest in quantum networking, to bypass the need of cipher algorithms

I heard that this is a large focus with the UK military which is why the planned on retiring their challnger tanks to focus more on cyber warfare since they don't have the number to compete on land warfare.

That all also makes it so no one really can invade them. They're far larger than the rest of the countries in the America's save the US and the fact that the US has maintained the idea for over a century that the America's are their sphere of influence and threaten war with anyone who'd attempt it. This almost lead to WW3 when Cuba aligned with the USSR and that was just an internal rebellion. The US is the only one who could invade and they have zero reason to do so.

Poise, São Paulo mesmo tem vantagem no terreno, destruindo os túneis que conectam a capital ao litoral, os militares não podem subir apenas contornar pelo Rio de Janeiro ou Paraná e nisso já perdem muitas horas tempo suficiente pra armar baterias antiaéreas na cidade e proteger as rodovias adjacentes

not too crazy.. the U.S entertained its troops many many times whilst they were in afghanistan and iraq, from comedians, celebs and many song artists. held massive concerts and such for them. can be justified by saying they were "bummed out" by being deployed so its almost the same thing

And strippers entertain US army

I'm seeing a battlefield where screams and explosions are replaced with clown noises and laughter...

@@legendaryryan1623 But the Chinese soldiers were in training, and the US Soldiers were in an army. And where did u hear of celebs? Lol US Only had prostitutes

USO

i am british too an they are right.

US may have the stronger military, but the British have better special forces and marines in my opinion

LAS MALVINAS SON ARGENTINAS

@@antpra The Falkland Islanders 🇫🇰 overwhelmingly voted 🗳 to remain British and they will.

@@BisexualPlagueDoctor Thats just a fact. My uncle was an Airborne Ranger. He eventually became an instructor. Taught airborne how to jump. He had been Airborne for years. Did hundreds of jumps. Before they had him teach other Airborne, he had to go to England and train with SAS or whoever.

More like:ЗАПИСЫВАЙТЕ ЭТО, ЗАПИСЫВАЙТЕ ЭТО!!!

I agrse

Agree I mean

@@nethercrocodile5859 I bet u used Google translate правдо?

@@Lalapoo11 he probably did for satire?

Paises gigantes territorialmente nunca serao invadidos, pois quem tentar vai fracassar. E so se basear em total de soldados e equipamentos nao diz nada, pois vejam a Russia, segundo mais forte nesta lista, esta sofrendo para derrotar a Ucrania que nem na lista aparece. Ah vao dizer q eh pq EUA/Europa estao ajudando, oras nao podemos esquecer to Pacto do Rio, que exige e demanda que todos os paises do continente americano protejam uns aos outros em caso de invasao estrangeira, ou seja, seria impossivel algum pais de outro continente tentar algo.

well thats why they are number 8 in a list with over 150 countries

Though not mentioned in the basically UScentric video, even us in Australia would be hard to invade. Not only is our climate against invasion, the geography can be a challenge, being mostly sparsely populated desert, the requirement for long supply lines, at least initially, is also a problem. The only way an invading force can get here is via sea or air.

I'd say Finland is up there too. Thousands of lakes and forests that makes it difficult to invade. Rough terrain and lots of swamp like terrain. Forcing you to invade on the roads where you can easily control the enemy and make them suffer for every inch of land they take

@@1991beachboy kind of like in the Winter War- a problem like what the Soviet Union suffered

@@Thexakatron yea. And that was just the winter when everything was frozen over. That wasn't when the swampy areas would be too much of a problem. The tracks of the heavy russian tanks on wet mud in the middle of swamps, lakes and forests would also be an easy target.

Agreed - the title is really misleading. In the UK part, for example, it talked entirely about how the UK struggles to project power over distance without US help (referencing the Falklands - 8000 miles away) and didn't even reference how easy/hard it would be to invade.

They’re openly lying. The Uk refused any help from the usa in the falkland wars and the war last 74 days. Also 100 British marines thrashed 1500 American soldiers in war drills.

Exactly I'm pretty sure a few us cargo ships are used to help with logistics but that can be expected when the conflict is 1000s of miles from home and the nearest base is only about 2/3 the way there

Red coats

Yup no mention of two new aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines etc

We don't have the biggest army, but we have the NHS lolololololololol Regardless, we have nuclear weapons, submarines, carriers, modern airforce, and who knows what cyberwarfare tech

Right

English was almost broken

@@ncpdswordshielddivision2240 he definitely can speak more languages than you so chill

@@aahaanarya6825 k

@@ncpdswordshielddivision2240 who?

we've had them since the 90s most likely but everything advanced like that is hidden

​@@kaeelondonnwe've been tinkering with them since the 60s

We had hypersonic missles since the 50s called the icbm.

@@legion5648 I think he means non-nuclear? Idk

@@legion5648 Non-nucleur kinetic impactors, not nucleur warhead tipped ICBM's

Hahah, how times have changed, 1000 years back in time we would watch our costs for vikings

@@gamenisgezond4464 Then again Swedish vikings weren’t the feared ones as they mostly traded in the east. Its the norwegian, danish and icelandic vikings that were a real threat

pewdiepie wants to know your location

What? Sweden has a strong military and makes world class aircraft and other weapons. It scores close to Canada and Ukraine which both have quite powerful militaries.

@@kurtsvensson4362 it's a joke

the quote is nice tho

And terrains are also a major factor in war

As someone who also has military and a small amount of general DoD experience, this point you lay out should be obvious to those who have been on any type of real-world battlefield, so I 100% agree. An additional point to keep in mind though, concerning technology and gear, we really have no idea what kind of weapons innovation the internal services (think triple-letter agencies, organizations like DARPA, and private defense contractors like Battelle) have come out with that 99.99% of people are not privy to. This same sentiment goes for the other world powers like China, Russia, Western European powers, S. Korea, etc.. This is largely a hunch, but I gua-ran-tee you that there are weapons tech at minimal functional prototype stages that would likely blow most of our minds. A modern hot war would be very interesting, not to mention terrifying for those parties involved. *EDIT:* There are multiple reasons why the U.S. Defense budget dwarfs even China by 2.5 times and "conspiracy theorists" talk about a 'Black Budget'.

@@ADPax10 yeah 100%, if a full scale war were to kick off it would have very little firefights between small groups with the tech and weapons advancement nowadays…whole divs would be getting wiped out in weeks if that

The most important part though is the alliances of the nation. For example if a country is in NATO they're essentially untouchable no matter how small the army,same for any country that has an official alliance with Russia or China. If they don't have an alliance but good relationships it will also be important like what happens in Ukraine (Russia facing heavy sanctions and also Ukraine constantly receiving equipment from the west and even some mercenaries). If it's let's say a middle Eastern country with no alliances (cough Afghanistan) things will be easier

Hehe hi

Yes but American or European will not consider it because of there own embracement 😂😂

you forgot arjun tank @kannan

also in India china border clashes of 2020 - INDIA only lost twenty personnel, while china only officially announced death of only 4 personnel but it was reported by a Australian media agency that 38 pla soldiers drowned in the water and died that day so total goes up to = 4+38=42 . So india clearly defeated china.

@@kartikkilam9959 In urgency of making video he forgot about doing some research 😂

But still they are hard to invade .. Russians may see a new revolution or coup against current dictatorship of Putin ( i like putin as a person ,but people of Russia may hate him for this unwanted Ukrainian war , which gained less , lost much ) .. That may change rankings .. India and China may go up ..

@@vandematram4 cringe

@@vandematram4 I feel right now China could go right into Siberia no problem and Putin's only response be nukes or suicide.... Russia is probably in like 5th place on this list.... and it depends on the conflict type, Vietnam? Afghanistan? David beats Goliath all the time...

hmm idk china is definietly higher than russia(on paper because we are yet to see them in a real battle) but India is a little behind because most of the indian weapons are russin made and a liitle old for the current time(they are in the 2000s era) but at this rate india might go up but china is definetly on top because they have wayy too much🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑@@vandematram4

But your english is good bro

Na verdade temos experiência militar sim!!! O exército brasileiro esteve envolvido em diversas operações, principalmente em operações de paz da ONU durante toda a Guerra Fria. Lutamos em Israel, Egito, Líbano, Chipre, República Centro Africana, Haiti, etc... Etc... As vezes com milícias organizadas, chefes do crime, a máfia, exércitos rebeldes, etc... Etc... Até nisso o vídeo está errado

@@gabrielmac369 não dá pra se comparar a experiência de ALGUNS militares com toda a contingência que compõe o exército, menos de 10% desses militares ativos talvez tenham alguma experiência de guerra.

To invade a country located in American continental, invaders can’t be an outsider because it’ll become a threat to USA & Canada… That’s why this continent is so quiet for now…

To invade a country located in American continental, invaders can’t be an outsider because it’ll become a threat to USA & Canada… That’s why this continent is so quiet for now…

Don't forget daddy USA.

Better to have and not need. Then not have and need it.

The u.s military existing is the reason most of the world can afford to not have military spending

yeah nuclear umbrella is a good thing for countries who can't fight for themselves.........

It’s better to be a warrior in a garden then a Gardner in a war

Your forgetting some of these counties do have the ability to build nuclear weapons but cannot because of a world treaty. So if their nation was into a threat,yes they can actually build their nukes,so if your American be kind to your neighbors without weapons of massive destruction.

Yep there's a reason the mainland hasn't been invaded since 1797 lol and that wasn't successful or well organised. Also we've been relying on "soft power" more and more now apparently (or so I've read) which could be argued is more beneficial to us considering where our country is placed (between the Atlantic Ocean/USA andCanada and Western/Northern Europe, both of which we have relatively good relationships with-despite leaving the EU). Frankly I'm glad we don't have a massive military, so long as the money saved is used for things like the NHS and other social programs-its a different world today than it was 100yrs ago or even since the Cold War

@@teethgrinder83 Hasn't ben invaded since 1797? Who? I don't know of anyone who did invade in 1797.

I think literally only the US could take over the UK out of any country in the world. But that would never happen.

@@shambhav9534 sorry I've been trying to send you a link about the invasion but my comment keeps disappearing for some reason. I'll try again but it was the French who invaded in Pembrokeshire so if you look that up you'll find out-it didn't go well at all lol I'll give the link a try again

@@nightmareparanormal yep for sure they could take us over especially as we rely on them for a lot of our military capabilities (intelligence being a large one as well as using their satellites) and those things alone would make us extremely vulnerable but like you say it wouldn't happen because it's just not in their interests at all

It's also the reason Japan is the 3rd wealthiest country in the world. No military spending need as much. Imagine the US not needing to waste money on military spending and putting it elsewhere?

Well yes and no as Germany was still forced to limit it's military and if I remember correctly can't have any more than 350000 troops to their name

@@Crashed131963 the us only spends 3% of it's budget on millitary, so it wouldn't change much

@@drakolithe6493 The US spends much more than 3% of its budget on the military.

Its depressing how japan is the only major country on earth that has to have its foreign relations and its military dictated by foreign powers, including its greatest enemy China. China sees itself as entitled to having aircraft carriers, nuclear weapons, biological weapons, and an aggressive imperialistic military but freaks out if Japan buys missile defense systems or tries to build any ship more powerful then a defensive destroyer. Can you imagine if Germany got to dictate what vehicles the russia military could build or if America got to decide if China was allowed to build any air defenses?

Wait north or south ? Because I thought in the south they had good equipment

@@bettabasics643 ofc south you think a North Korean will be on RU-vid?

@@bettabasics643 south. Yes we have good equipments but only available to very few divisions or brigades. Majority of us are stuck with very outdated equipments.

@@warti4080 beat me to it🤣🤣🤣

@@JamesSpazer Thanks for the input. Its always nice to have people with personal experience verifying Infographics' information.

^^^ *this.* The United States’ geography is so incredibly impressive for defense against foreigners that it’s almost feels like cheating. Not only are there the vast oceans to the east and west, but also allied nations to the north and south. Even if you managed to somehow get past the oceans undetected, you’d have to go through the largest navy in the world and the air force before ever reaching land. Framing the two coasts are also two enormous mountain ranges-the Rocky Mountains and the Appalachian Mountains. You also brought up the point of the insane amount of citizens armed with firearms. I currently live in a community where hunting is the hobby of the majority of people-they know how to use those fire arms and are not afraid to. Next is the sense of patriotism. A country will fight harder than _ever_ when their country is on the line. It’s completely different than being the ones invading others. Also did I mention how the United States can be energy and food dependent? Cutting off trading or outside help wouldn’t do much since the United States can sustain itself with its vast amount of resources. Plus there is almost every biome here imaginable and foreign soldiers cannot prepare for everything. I’m not even going to bring up how every country in NATO would have to come the the US’s aid. I’m only scraping the surface here as well 😂

Fk infographics. US has done more for the world than anyone deserves. He is overly critical.

@@Asylia5911 absolute MONEY of an explanation for only some of the advantages for the US and disadvantages for foreign aggression.

@@MichaelGarcia-ez4mj thank you! I’m glad my geography nerd self could be helpful :)

@@Asylia5911 ya just look at world vs US scenarios, sans nukes

being t3rr0r1sts you're right oh and being wasted by Afghanistan

English or British? I'm pretty sure you are talking about British soldiers.

Doesn't matter, English British, same thing my dude

@@Therabidrabbit89 Doesn't matter? You're not very bright, are you? Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish soldiers aren't English, nor do you see English flags on British military uniforms. It's not like people call you a Kiwi either, right?

@@incumbentvinyl9291 exactly. They came from England so I called them English, always someone gotta argue over technicalities lol 😆

We do out weird stickers on our bombs dont we

is that supposed to be a bad thing or a good thing like bro I really love hello kitty

@@linaabusriwel1222 Good. It's just an expression.

Brazil have hypersonic aircraft too

current developing but is almost finished

goated name

In the end, we all go to Brazil.

thats true for pretty much the whole of south america

Well to be fair our true problem is that our military see themselves as many things, except a military force Teenagers get in for the easy money, adults stay to avoid job market, High-Ranking military thinks of themselves as some sort of high society. And nobody looks like they could fight anything other than civilians

Source?

@@praddumnvats6759 it's official...

@@praddumnvats6759 source: Trust me Bro

@@criesandthrowsuponthefloor608 Fake ID...😂

@AFKSOLITUDE Fake ID... Fake Name... 😂

Not to mention the US has so many military bases on its borders that it’s practically impossible to invade it

Yeah well Mexico I in the Bricks now and China has a ton of troops stationed in Canada so what you are saying is not true anymore

@@ShermanMark1 You might want to rethink your statement about chinese troops in Canada. There are no chinese troops in Canada unless you are referring to chinese immigrants which admittedly we have, but I daresay that most of them would fight to stay free of china.

@@sattyre6892 nah you just obviously haven't heard of China having troops training in Canada and they even sent us a video clip of them doing it in Canada

@@ShermanMark1 take your propaganda somewhere else. Right now, my government is really at odds with your government. My government being Canadian, and I'm guessing your government being China,

Right! If they are concerned about wasted money there are a few other US agencies that have squandered at a much higher and consistent rate.

On top of that I understand he wanted to be critical, but he make few mistakes regard US: 1) US is in position allowing them test future solutions. Though some didn't pay of another did (Boston Dynamic). 2) Zumwalt tech would be used in promising actual next generation of ships. 3) LCS were intended as coastal guard, but cost overruns make clear that it is cheaper to buy Frigates. 4) F-35 is actually good, just still didn't reach maturity. But it would be mass produced in near future. 5) US has hypersonic missiles from 70's and they actually would install them on Zumwalt.

Typical westerner spreading fake propaganda while trying to justify it with "dictator bad, I love democracy"

*its You got that wrong trice, impressive.

And is planning to make Tejas MK II, a more modern fighter then Rafael.

Pakistan dont have f16 at 1970

@@Amen-Magi he said '1970s Mig-21', Get your education from good university not from Madarsa

@@Amen-Magi I think you don't understand English..... don't try that hard....it will be okay

That also says a lot about the pilots capabilities, it takes brains to be able to take down two way more modern planes. Respect.

I'm Brazilian too, and the thing is that no one would invade the Amazon, not directly, because it makes no sense, if a foreign country wanted to take our resources they would obviously try to take the cities first and take down the government, instead of invading the jungle.

@@rafaelalodio5116 Yes, but the main cities are thousands of kilometers away from the amazon and many of them have more than 10 million people, which means they're hard and expensive to control. This topic became quite interesting in the context we are currently in. Look at Russia's invasion of Ukraine with their convoys having a hard time reaching Kiev on pavemented roads. Imagine the challenge the same convoys would have to reach the capital of the Amazon, Manaus? It would not be possible. Tanks stuck on mud, roads suddenly becoming rivers, bridges collapsing, roads literally disintegrating in front of your eyes, etc... Ambushing a military convoy crossing any point in such a scenario would be "easy" task

@@_Bruno_Cesar_ My point is that an invading force wouldn’t have to do any of that, they would need to take control of the major cities, which are mostly in the coast (that would make it a little bit easier), and after taking control of the country they could simply use the civilian infrastructure to explore whatever resources they want to take. Not saying that would be easy, I’m saying that no one would need to actually invade a forest to achieve that goal, that would be dumb.

@@rafaelalodio5116 Dont forget Brazil is a federative republic. Taking a city doesnt mean you conquered an entire country, especially a country the size of Brazil. Just look at Afghanistan. Conquering Rio, for example, would mean little to nothing to Manaus, which is the capital of the Amazon. You cant easily explore the amazon without conquering Manaus. And above all, doesn't exist a country in this world that could fully take control of Rio or SP if the population is against the intervention. Controlling Rio, SP and BH (almost 40 million people) all at the same time is almost impossible without deploying less than a million troops.

@@_Bruno_Cesar_ My grandfather was stationed in Manaus during WWII. He said the excessive heat and humidity almost killed him.

O brasil e um pais gigantesco, realmente difícil de manter um ocupação, mas em caso de invasões o brasil perde com certa facilidade dependendo do inimigo

Okej but… you dont walk in the amazons in modern war, naval and air combat wil be huge part , maintaining occupation is station troops here and there… you all might pack a huge punch bc of population count and the favelas killing enemys coming in city by foot as ukraine did on russians… but its one punch and wont be supplied in longer term, invest in newer jets than gripen as they are not best in modern day (spoken from a swedie), impressive battlefield tho and im sure not everyone can operate in such conditions

Tomahawks makes things a lot easier, but Brazil has a huge landscape and a mixture of terrains, will be quite hard for the logistics and troops moving here and there. Naval landing might work, but at a certain cost too, will be quite a battle tbh, but we're friends with most of the superpowers, so I doubt any of them would try to invade us 👀 But if we rely on our government, our troops will be stuck with Vietnam war era equipment, sadly...

The Brazil's biggest self-defense weapon is it's diplomacy

Without any army, Brazil would be one of the 5 most difficult places to invade. Amazon is a challenge for modern warfare (big terrain, natural protection aggainst armored vehicle and a lot of natural diseases for troops). Northeast is drawght and protected by mountains. A swamp and mountains guard southweast. The only natural vulnerability is the south portion of the country. To occupy Brazil you need to fight Vietnam style war and afganistan style at the same time. Brazil reallies on guerrilla tactics for self defense, that's why it armored vehicles and air defenses are so weak.

LOL

I can singlehandedly invade Poland with a stick.

@@djamelhamdia134 with its rap sheet most people can

My uncle had always told me he cursed the m16 multiple times during Vietnam. How far its come is wild

@@Travster93 How many commies did he shoot?

As far as I'm concerned the F22 needs a few upgrades and it can hold up for years to come

@@Tavemanic what upgrades do you think it needs?

@@ipant1056 Now, I don't know too much more than the average person does about the F22, but I'd assume the military could essentially revamp it's internals and engines with newer equipment, although it still holds up fine off the ground

@@Tavemanic I usually would agree with you but the internals are pretty modern 1990's-2000's tech and replacing them currently would be a waste of money and could cause big issues if not done correctly or if somethings overlooked

F-22 production/repair is costly thanks to politics. So...theres that.

With the Gripen they would be.

they also used a us airstrip in a airbase lent to america by the british. i fell like the british militery was downplaying in this video no mention if its modern airforce or 2 carriers

I know, who wouldn't use allied help to launch a war 8,000 miles away? They launched faster than they would have done if they didn't have help, but with a few more months they would have been able to do it alone.

Look at all the teaboos coping

i know, he didn't mention any of the huge positives of the uk military

@@blink182bfsftw dude you're a blink 182 fan, come on

That doesn't help at all with dictators such as Putin around.

Except US police aren't militarized save for Riot and FBI response teams. Most of them just have an AR or a shotgun if needed but most training is devoted to investigation.

The national guard does just that. We can be deployed overseas

@@Darqshadow lol you’ve never had a swat team which moved and acted just like a house clearing assault team bust into your house because someone SWATING you. Even small town cops all have M4’s these days. That is militarized goof

Switzerland might be a better idea

Any Scandinavian place is a good idea.

The US will invade it, better go to Argentina like certain Austrian painter.

New Zealand

I'm going to Switzerland

Canada is the USA ‘s little brother.

There is nothing special about that as almost all other countries have done that too. In other words the UK's power isn't increasing in relation to their peers.

@@incumbentvinyl9291 our only ‘peers’ would be Russia & China. We don’t necessarily have enemies. Russia has been declining since 1991, and china is facing serious problems such as lack of faith in the government & decreasing power (recent) in their economy

@@TheWeekday2100 Using what logic would those be your only ''peers''? How has Russia been declining since 1991? That's an absurd claim that proves that you know nothing about the world around you. What lack of faith in the government in China? The living standards of the Chinese people has improved very significantly the past few decades. What proof do you have of lack of faith for the government? Are you sure you're not talking about the British government?

In the last 2 months 2 of the planes have crashed into the sea.. that is not a good record

Absolutely. Improved versions of the the F-15 and F-16 are being used as weapons carriers for the F-35 because the navy and the air force are mostly integrated on the same targeting and radar systems.

@@HaiLsKuNkY deluded

Plus, there are countries willing to buy f35 jets for some reason.

@@HaiLsKuNkY yes, but its still weird that many nations are still buying the f35 jets for some reason.

They are poorly trained, poorly equipped, very few volunteers and their Navy and Air Force are both jokes. Their cyber warfare capabilities are also nill. Just a bunch of guys in uniforms, basically...and they have nukes (weak ones) but the delivery systems can't get past even basic counter-ICBM tech.

@@sterlingcampbell2116 i’m pretty sure since 2010 North Korea has sunk more ships more then America and you have no Way to determine how well trained their troops are and there anti-air force is filled with Battle proven equipment so you’re wrong

@@avus-kw2f213 Haha, whatever you say, champ

@@aquapotato.. still better than the Taliban

@@aquapotato.. imagine 5 million Taliban with nuclear weapons and paramedics that have got to make it to the top 10

India will never invade bhutan . We are not like china

Yeah true i am an India

India has other problems to worry about (China and Pakistan) so it probably will not ever invade Bhutan, and besides, India-Bhutan relations are very friendly. Bhutan-China relations are very strained, so China is a more likely choice for an aggressor of Bhutan.

Search Doklam Crisis 2017 🇧🇹🇨🇳🇮🇳

He made a video on it

Sadly, they went 'there', so now the US goes there, and suddenly 'First Strike' becomes the reasoned option, 'use it or lose it'. A dangerous place to be

Russia and China have hypersonic jets and missiles way before the us did

@@zkf5448 but not enough of them

How is this a double edges sword? It seems great all 'round.

@@williamrosenbloom215 We have had the longest running era of global peace between the greater nations greatly because of the threat of mutually assured destruction from nukes. If someone (even the US) eventually thinks otherwise thinks could get messy.

One Ohio class sub can destroy and country , does the US even need new tricks?

Us failed the laser weapons test.

I disagree. Times have changed drastically. Every modern military has technological means to find out where there enemy is hiding. Besides, with global urbanization, once you've taken over the cities, the war is already won.

@@TheStickman419 ''Lol'' The US did beat Afghanistan. Where have you been? Yes, they hid in the mountains, they had no political power. The only reason they came out of their caves is because the USA *left* Afghanistan. Those Islamic groups are basically poorly equipped terrorist cells, not comparable to the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan and had a capable military with semi modern US materiel. France left because of the same reasons why the USA left. It's not worth the money and effort, not because they weren't in control of the situation or hadn't won the war. Guerilla warfare is a thing of the past that has only very limited use in any modern conflict.

It stated that it couldn't have done that without help from the US. It doesn't matter how good you can do if you can't get there

You really did not pay attention

Also love how they say the UK can't project power, despite us having 2 Super Carriers and the largest Navy in Europe. Something tells me this channel has an agenda

@@evancourtois7778 that may have something to do with the UK being thousands of miles away geographically when in comparison to the US

@@shingetsu10 Could it be that be that the infographics show makes mistakes on a constant basis and is not a reliable source, only existing to spam out videos? No it can’t be that, no way

Russia may struggle with invading another country but nobody can invade them

Bermuda is not recognised by the UN, its British Territory and Britain reliant.

Your protection is the best of all; you are not attractive enough to attack & plunder. You are simply to small. Which is brilliant.

The iran is not a easy nation to invade as well, sense it's a mountainous terrain, aka attrition, plus it has strong millitary, usa maybe bearly able to defeat iran.

Me too

I’m pretty sure the video you are talking about is only about the “Hardest countries to invade”

It's the nukes

The russians are holding back,if they use their full arsenal without regard of urban areas (Like the us have done in irak) they would have crushed the ukranias in the first three weeks

Cause there's a huge difference between war and military operation. For Ukraine it's war. For Russia - just military operation, since we use less than 20% of our power. And our economy didn't turn military. That's the difference, cause if Russia will go full throttle into mobilization, military economy and real war, you will see quite soon why Russia is number 2.

@@ГеоргийШендриков-н6и yeah but the general population would be against it, since it's basically attacking and invading a country that is family. That's why Putin keeps insisting it's just an operation. Also the high amount of conscription, unclear objectives, lack of training, failures in the communications from chain of command; have so far proven that Russia is no longer the second strongest army, just the second "most nukes" country.

Nope. Not true still number two. Russia army is doing military operation and you failed to mention Ukraine is supported by 48 other countries this 48 vs 1 and Russia is still striking with ez and it’s military is cooperating without any hesitation. 🇷🇺💤🪖🎖

they are kinda hard to invade tho they are an island

@@scaramapanghe true I live there and the only thing you would get if you invade are sheep,cows, and kiwifruit.

@@May62015 New Zealanders certainly love their sheep haha. Aus and NZ would be near impossible to invade, NZ more so since it's smaller but regardless they wouldn't go down without a looong fight.

@@Raelexx Yea that’s for sure. Invading Nz would be quite hard and honestly I don’t know why you would want to. There’s only 5 million people.

@Yesmine Khayati actually it's like India is trying to rebuild that

Yes. I know that Canadian Armed Forces regularly trains with Jamaican forces.

Lol, true 😂 I like Vietnamese people they are small but very hard working people.

@@NgarKua agreed! This time, this particular video is kinda biased so no like from me this time!

Well, they were forced to do so by the US

@@Cecil_Augus yes but that didn't mean they had to continue doing that forever. The fact that it is true to this day stands as a testament to that, especially while they are also at risk of conflict with other countries right now including the clearly volatile and unstable russia.

Really? I don't remember Japan formally apologising for its actions in WW2. Infact, they still lie to themselves about it at the highest levels of society. Honour pffffft

@@stubbsieshorse327 they do that to stop insurrection in house which can be a big problem and is in fact a big part of what caused thier involvement in ww2 in the first place. And yes these days they deny involvement, but I think actions speak a lot louder than words here.

@@stubbsieshorse327 to be fair japan was dragged into the hypernaripnalistic focus by force by it's military. Look at Krauts video "how japans democracy fell" But it stills doesn't excuse the government to apologize for it. Yeah it was couped and dragged into war without even consent. But the people should've done something.

''I have to disagree with you about our lack of combat experience, and I assure you we do have a lot of combat experience'' Where does the military personnel of Brazil have combat experience?

@@incumbentvinyl9291 Haiti. But that's against local warlords, not a real army.

So like Man United Have Ronaldo,Varane,Rashford,Sancho,Bruno but still draw and lose

Make nuke, detonate nuke!

Lol. Nice !

I like how the video gave exact numbers to their strength in numbers too. An updated count would cut those numbers by around 1/3