How many countries has England/Great Britain/United Kingdom NOT invaded

As per an interesting discussion I had over dinner, the UK has in its time invaded most of the nations on Earth at one time or the other. Are there any it has not?

I can think of Mexico and perhaps Chile and the DR Congo.

For this thread

Invaded= Attacked, bombed, sent in an army, blockaded. Clandestine special ops do not count.

Country" nation state that exists today and territory controlled by them, excepting overseas colonies.

UK= The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and its predecessors’ as well as the British Empire including self governing dominions pre-1931.

Interesting question. Do you count ancient tribes that eventually contributed to the UK? For example, do Irish pirate attacks against Norse settlements in Iceland count as a UK predecessor invasion?

Speaking of Spanish colonies (you mentioned Mexico), I believe that the UK tried at least twice to take over Puerto Rico and was defeated both times. At least once they managed to take El Morro but died of disease shortly afterward.

In this particular case it’s immaterial, because the UK invaded Iceland in WW2. I had to Wiki it to see if it was by invitation or not, but it wasn’t: it was against Iceland’s stated neutrality, even though it was bloodless.

There is a list of the “lucky” 22 here.

For a supposedly peace-loving nation, that’s a soberingly short list.

Of your examples, Mexico and Chile were raided when they were part of the Spanish empire.

I would disagree with the inclusion of Guatemala. That’s only true on the technicality that the part that was invaded/colonized became British Honduras, now Belize. Until a few decades ago Guatemala still showed Belize as part of its territory on its official maps.

I love the Dope. However, of the list, Sweden certainly had British operations off it waters during the Napoleonic wars as well as coastal bombardment. The Ivory Coast, well the British had outposts there and when the British invaded China, Mongolia was technically part of it.

That’s a questionable definition of “invade”. To me the word implies military incursion with the intent of taking over a substantial part of the territory.

That seems to be somewhat too narrow of a definition: The US invaded Normandy in WWII, for instance, even though we had no intention of “taking over” any of Europe.

I would say that the allied forces did indeed intend to take control of substantial parts of Europe.

But only temporarily, and as a collective force. Essentially, I’d class it as anywhere where the British forces have been present through force rather than consent of the occupying/host nation.

So any skirmish between two neighbouring territories, in which forces cross the border, is an invasion?

Pretty much, yeah. There’s invasion for conquest and other kinds of invasion, such as raids or simply to force the enemy to submit to your will.

The British also sent troops into Mexico to support the French intervention in 1861 that put Maximillian on the throne.

The qualifications for the list seem questionable to me.

So if the British rented a naval base from you, or sent a few pith-helmeted guys with rifles traipsing through your jungle, they “invaded” you?

It would seem that given the loose definition of “invaded,” Luxembourg only made the list by getting liberated by American troops in both world wars.

When was this? The only thing I could find was that the British sailed close to the Swedish coast in 1801 to avoid bombardment from the Danish. Hardly an invasion.

What about Finland?

Yes, the definition is absurd.

Numerous questions.

For example Korea. Britain “invaded” it by sending troops supporting the UN lead Korean war in support of South Korea. Humm.

I’m wanting to know about how the British invaded every country in South America except Paraguay and Bolivia.

Try Admiral Cochrane, he would responsible for some of it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cochrane,_10th_Earl_of_Dundonald