Could the USA conquer the UK?

Could the USA conquer the UK?

Attached: aiovWCsuckah0IZJ7-Jl_k89P0uXTqlda-8_OMbSwCg.jpg (960x640, 120.81K)

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/fc7ak
nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/egg poster.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Anybody could conquer us.
Fucking Ireland could if they really wanted to, you would even have progressives defending it because they have Anglo guilt.

ZOG v. ZOG?

I'm wondering how quickly the country would collapse if any form of civil war happened.

No. They never applied for a annexation license.

Literally weeks, the only other country that wants to be in the UK is Northern Ireland for some goddamn reason. If the Scots saw a chance they'd go 1916 on us in an instant.

Christ is there anything a civil war wouldn't solve?

Why does England cling onto Scotland so much?

It wouldn't fix Londoners being shitheads.

Fuck if I know, they did the same with NI during The Troubles even though we had no reason to keep them after industry died in country.

Attached: Shrug.jpg (683x442, 52.3K)

Israel has already conquered both

Probably, certainly the USN could crush the RN and then prevent any importation of food etc which would strangle the country economically. Actually invading and holding ground might be a bit harder, the logistical challenge of landing fucktons of troops in a hostile nation and supplying them long-term is not to be underestimated even for the world's most effective military. Remember that even defeating Iraq relied on being able to build up forces in a friendly nation that shared a land borde and the USN would have to ship everything needed for the invasion force and the invading forces halfway around the world. Getting the French or Irish to help would make things significantly easier.

The UK is, legally speaking, the union of Scotland and England. Removing Scotland changes the fundamental character of the nation. Also Scotland's problem is really with (((London))), it's just that most Scots confuse London with England.

No but thermobaric rocket artillery would.

The Queen is also the Queen of Scotland

She's also technically the Queen of Australia and Canada but you didn't see us hold onto them as hard.
I want this fucking kingdom to break apart, once the champagne socialists can't just move out to the Highlands and still vote in general elections you'll start seeing some changes in how they vote.

In other words if the USA took a calm, long-term approach and just blockaded the UK and actually tried to pander to the locals to avoid insurgencies then yes. If instead they did the classical American thing of rolling in with shock and awe direct invasion + fuck the locals it's more questionable and probably would end poorly.

In an interesting legal twist she's also not the head of the Scottish Church Scotland has no official church and she has no role in the Kirk whereas she is the head of the CoE. You have a strange situation of two separate legal systems for Scotland and England but only one actual parliament thanks to the Act of Union the recent devolved parliaments like Holyrood are a bit of legal fiction, they are on paper at least not independent entities but just bodies with control over a subset of Westminster's powers that could be revoked at any time, this compares with the Scottish judiciary which are actually independent of their southern counterparts on This is why the queen dresses very differently when opening the Scottish Parliament. There's a lot of weird legal technicalities like that in the UK.

Glasgow is a much larger problem than the Highlands.

I mean people from posh parts of England move to cheap parts of Scotland and Wales and make votes that still affect England.

>Chyna and Russia won't intervene because of borders

I don't have a picture of a smug anime loli to could properly convey the amount of smug that situation would present.

Attached: 7eff734367618925b41c61b5f30f1d919a7bbdc1a41cd3b4ecf1dd7c5d1d104a.jpg (255x255, 17.25K)

I can't speak for Wales but in Scotland there's not many of them in the grand scheme of things and most leave once the locals turn on them. The exception to that is Orkney and Shetland which also consistently votes Lib Dem. Glasgow's leftists have a much more damaging effect on the UK by sheer number

You'd be a shithead too if you had to live in London.

If we could project quarter of our power even we would be able to do it. At the moment Poland annexing it is the safest bet.

Attached: if only you knew.jpg (917x751, 269.61K)

This is photoshop, r-right?

Attached: rain.gif (500x281, 746.48K)

If you mean 'could the USA destroy the UK armed forces?' then yes, I'd like to say they'd give you a decent fight but after the last few governments that's probably not true. However, if you mean 'can the USA occupy the UK and turn it into a part of America?' (the more accurate meaning of 'conquer') then you'd have your hands full. Apart from the obvious logistics issues we've seen how America handles occupations and, bluntly, you're not good at it. You'd create whole new generations of militant nationalists before a Democratic candidate won the white-house on a mandate of 'bring our boys home'.

Come on, it's just a civil war, not a hard reset of the laws of the universe, you can't ask that much of it.

Apart from the whole 'no government likes secessionist groups' thing you mean? It's a part of the nation that until recently provided a decent revenue from the oil fields, and the Scots can't be trusted to run a country by themselves. Look at the current members of the SNP, who's policies can be summarised as 'VOTE FOR ME IF YOU WANT EVEN MORE WELFARE!' - it's the reason Scotland became the second half of the UK. It wasn't the conquests and occupations, it was the Scots begging for a bail out after they'd fucked their colonial ventures so hard that they were beyond broke.

He fucks Camilla so…

Because of economic and bureaucratic headaches it would entail. You see, then they had to take out the blue bits out of the Union Jack for one thing, which would means billions of pounds wasted on buying new flags for ships, military bases, schools, airfields, public and government buildings, etc. etc. New stamps and notes and whatevers would have to be reprinted and whatnot. The new Union Jack would just be a red asterist on a white background. Of course, the same goes for Australia and New Zealand and elsewhere that encorporate it in their flags. New roundels have to be designed for the RAF, new insignias, new logos, new ribbons, new everything, all using colour schemes with just two colours for everything because they'd have no reason to use blue then. And they just can't afford it right now.

Charles likes larp'ing as a Saudi King every time he goes to Saudi Arabia.

Attached: Prince_Charles_Buro_cover.jpg (700x390, 190.96K)

maybe if Poles developed any sort of ingroup instinct and asking Trump to not have everything stolen as "jew reparations" in a bill that works against entirety of western civilization not be met with nuclear kvetching.

...

I remember reading that as cucked as the USN is, the RN and 'Strayan navy are relatively uncucked. They lose by sheer firepower, but the US would take heavy losses if mock battles we have with other English-speaking navies are any indication.

Easily and at this point it would be a huge improvment

Pride from the general populace. From a more pragmatic side from a geopolitical and military viewpoint it would complete fuck them as being an island nation separate and self contained from europe. They would once again have to struggle for control of Brittania against the scots.

Wew

He should at least LARP as a European king, until he becomes one for real.

What said.
We can't be fucking trusted to run a country, either. SNP are also losing popularity now that people are realizing they're nationalists in name only.

It doesn't. Scotland clings onto England while acting like a bunch of niggers screaming gibz dat. England would be more than happy to shed Scotland and watch them fall flat on their face.
People overestimate how much support the SNP actually has and the support they do have are with blatant idiots who don't understand that money doesn't grow on trees. If Scotland became independent it would make Venzeuela look like a relatively stable state in sunny paradise.

The whole SNP policy is pushing more wealthfare policy that is unsustainable while doing nothing to promote job growth and blaming everything on England. They want to actually leave the UK so they can have even less powers under the EU. I AM NOT MAKING THIS SHIT UP! I look forward to if Scotland does gain independence and the first thing goes wrong for them they try to blame the EU and watch how the EU won't take shit as kindly as England does.
Anyone who honestly supports the SNP are worse than niggers. Not even niggers are this retarded.

The choice is clear.

Attached: 5fb.jpg (850x400, 100.06K)

daddy america please dom my government hard

France and Germany could conquer UK.

It's okay. We'll build a wall around your country to keep the rapists, murderers, and Fr*nch out. Except for Wales. Wales we'll just detach from the rest of the island and sink into the Irish Sea.

Wales is alright, just get rid of Northern Ireland, it was a mistake to not give them back and now they demand gibs constantly.

what even is wales

All I know is that they shag sheep and speak fucking Elvish.

North Sea oil.

Ain't even gonna lie the reactions are great

...

She had it coming by being a mudshark.

this tbh

She was with mudskin child. She should have known better.

It's always baffled me how upset people got over the death of a "princess" who left her husband for a hadji.

Well, the queen herself is related to muhammad now, dont'cha know?

already happened, unfortunately it was the anglo american establishment and they hated most of england and america.

Hasn't England not been ruled by actual English since 1066? First it was the Normans. The Plantagenets were French. The Tudors were Welsh. The Stuarts were Scottish. The Georgians were German. And all the monarchs since have been offshoots of the Georgians, and are German to the point of having a very German-sounding house name (I mean their original one, Saxe-Coburg, not the "House of Windsor" which they created because of WW2).

Come to think about it, there weren't that many English monarchs before 1066 either. The Danes ruled from 1016-1042, and the Kingdom of England wasn't even created until 927. So that makes a grand total of 113 years of English rule of England over the past 1091 years of English history, or about 10% of all English history involving the English actually having an English king.

Londoners can't be shitheads if they don't have heads to begin with.

Attached: CnckbjchyvZ.jpg (636x420, 39.82K)

Keep in mind that early England was freshly settled Germanic people who threw the Celts out and settled the lands they conquered. Germanic raiders began as the Roman empire crumbled in Britain, but the big settlement period lasted for a long time, so by the time there was a true "England", what was the big difference between the English Anglo-Saxons-Jutes and other Germanic people that comprised the population and the other Vikings? Some Jute descendent in England would say "We settled here in the 750's" than in 950 how foreign are those Danes and Danish kings?

Even by the time of "French" Norman takeover, England was still so close to its norther Germanic roots that it wasn't considered so foreign at all. various Viking rulers could claim the throne, that's why there was that whole series of conflicts and eventual Norman takeover, because the Normans were just viking settlers in northern France, who just so happened to bring French armored cavalry to the battle instead of the old shieldwall.

There's a lot of salt to be taken with some of this.

So you're basically saying that the Eternal Anglo is very similar to the Eternal G*rman?

Nah, they mostly just interbred or set themselves up in positions of power over the Celts, they didn't displace the peasant population really, the same thing happened with the Normans, no-one other than the royal family or their advisors could speak French. England is still majority Celtic genetically.

But yeah, the English/Danes/Normans were all fighting over the crown because they were all pretty much just different flavours of viking that were all related. Basically just families fighting over control for their new colony, except one of those families just happened to live in said colony.
The whole "REEEE, ENGLAND DIED AFTER 1066" is a massive meme, the Normans invading was pretty much no different than the English invading a few hundred years before.

We don't, they cling onto us while we spoonfeed them massive amounts of bennies because they have 0 industry any more and require funding to prevent them from collapsing. Scotland is to England what Greece is to Germany.
Just look at the Scottish independence vote.

Sage for doublepost

So basically England hasn't had an English king since 43 AD?

English means Anglo, which is a germanic tribe.

You mean a celtic/welsh king, it might have ended with King Arthur 2 (there are two king Arthur).

Yes. The USA often invades islamic nations.

archive.is/fc7ak

Nice try. All of this 'white race" stuff started because Celts in Britain wanted to be on par with the English and English privilege. Then you get this nonsense that the Celts/English intermarried or the Germanic people barely settled and only ruled over the Celt people and now "Celts and English are all the same" bullshit.

Save for the fact that everywhere that Vikings lightly settled and ruled over as lords ended up losing all of its Germanic essence and eventually the natives and their culture sustained and remained majority. Save for the fact the Germanic people ousted the Celts from England and settled it with their own people, like how the Romans did to the Celts in various parts of Europe like Iberian peninsula, or the Germans did to the Slav's and Celts in various parts of Europe. Surprise: Normandy wasn't just ruled by Vikings, it was settled by them to the point they became the regional population. Same with England.

Many parts of Europe were lightly settled with Vikings and ruled by them, but they aren't anything close to Germanic England, because those scenarios of "elite families" ruling always ended up with the Vikings dying off and being forgotten. There is a reason why England is so different than Viking settled parts of the rest of Britain, because those areas weren't purged of Celts and resettled with a different people entirely.

Attached: IRISHARETENGLISH.png (607x368, 75.19K)

Attached: 1111.jpg (739x739, 77.46K)

Don't post that image, you'll trigger the Australians.

Why did you post the picture of emu? They may look cool but they are scary.

better?

Attached: 2eecbb7d7181d982a9febb455bdbd7372b8efc38a973936affb1bf0c085d1cd4.jpg (611x625, 279.99K)

I cannot frickin believe that you posted that to make fun of the Aussies.

If the Aussie's natural predator is the Emu, what is the Emu's natural predator?

The leaf?

Uh…I believe that would be extinct giant lizard. I want to ride on giant lizard.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

They're saying that the majority of English ethnic make up is primarily Germanic and not Celtic meaning that the Celts were either forced from their land and was resettled. This instead of a small amount of Germanic settlers arriving and intermarrying with the Celtic population meaning the English are closer to the Irish than the Germans or Danish.

Celt and germanics belong to the same race anyhow, germans means "neighbors".

Y E S

Y

E

S

Alright Mr Chinaman.

I'm the resident germanicboo.

If you're going by that logic then everyone from east asia is 'basically the same race'.

Just popping back in to say that the Trump balloon is a massive failure and everyone is laughing after the lefties for being such fuck ups (the BBC is still doing constant coverage of it despite our government being in full collapse mode)

Attached: Dh-uz4QXcAA4Qub.jpg (1040x780 259.87 KB, 131.95K)

wew it's fucking tiny

American military couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag without eleven powerpoints on how to respek wamen.

But a non cucked country like Japan could easily conquer the UK.

Island state vs Island state, and they'd steamroll the brits without taking any losses.

As I've said before, anybody could conquer the UK if they really wanted to.

I mean genuine conquer, as in you become an official part of Japan, every brit speaks japanese, and there are red haired samurai wielding explosive naginatas all over the place.

Yeah, that's what I mean.
The UK is a fucking joke now, user. You can't buy eggs or flour at certain times of the year without an ID, do you think our people are mentally prepared for any kind of war? They'd crack quickly and submit to any kind of aggression.

No way you have to be lying.

nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/egg poster.pdf

It reminds me of Spinal Tap tbh.

It's around Halloween to stop yobbo's from throwing flour at peoples houses (and eggs).

<

IT'S TIME FOR I M P E R I U M

Attached: PRINCE WEEB.jpg (500x677 204.73 KB, 157.41K)

I thought you couldn't buy eggs at all without ID because apparently broken eggshells are sharp.

I have no words. I fucking hate the britbongs almost as much as I hate the roaches, but this just makes me feel sad.

Attached: 458.jpg (928x906, 112.12K)

That’s insane.

Excuse my curiosity, my denbtistani friend, but is there a single nation out there you don't hate? And by 'don't hate' I do not mean 'like', you know, just don't hate with absolute, burning, genocidal passion.

...

Brexit pretty much dead at this point isn’t it? I have a feeling every EU member will be JEWed out of exits.