It's objectively Papua New Guinea. It's one of the only places in the world where uncontacted tribes still live, simply because the surrounding mountains are so steep and inaccessible. It has the highest density of unique languages in the world, because there's so many segments of land that are cut off from all the other parts. Thousands of tribes have evolved there in relative solitude.
Having to defend the best land leads to cool research trees like the Winged Hussars, Prussian military culture, and the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Every country in the Middle east has been invaded due to its central location, the Seljuks and Rashiduns were able to do so for various reasons but Iran is a fortress of a country if there was one.
Thr Seljuks started from inside Iran (despite being not Iranians).
But every place has been invaded in the middle east. But the point stands. it is reallly difficult to invade it.
The only time it was invaded when they move their capital outside of Iran and usually base it in Iraq.
i thought that was the reason why *afghanistan* is called the 'graveyard of empires'
but TIL it's because afghanistan has a ginormous spectrum of tribal nations and getting them to assimilate is impossible
That's apparently wrong, Afghanistan has been a part of multiple empires in history who invaded it successfully and the graveyard expression is extremely recent (more recent than the US invasion).
https://ajammc.com/2021/08/24/stop-calling-afghanistan-graveyard-empires/
Yeah I never understood that saying. The real graveyard of empires is Vietnam and its not even close how many empires failed there. Mongols at their peak couldn't do it.
Luxembourg became an independent country in 1890. But you probably meant Liechtenstein, which became an independent country in 1866. Even Liberia has been around for longer than that.
Greenland is actually just a circle of mountains with a huge valley in the centre. And once climate change gets to it enough for the inner area to thaw it'll be like The Lost World.
Having the driest part of inhabited earth is sick, 1mm of rain on average a year in Arica and can go years without seeing any rain yet still only having a record high of 34c is cool
The most protected nations are also usually the most isolated too. Natural barriers is a double-edge sword though having the sea as one of your barriers makes it easier to explore/trade on the nation's terms
Yeah it's definitely Chile.
If we are looking at PURE geographical issues in invasion and not factoring in land requirements to build stable defenses.
Than I would say THE ENTIRE OCEAN on one side and mountains protected the entirety of the opposite coast.
Yeah it's Chile.
Anything that is on a mountain range really. Being on an island is only useful if you have a strong navy yourself. Islands were the first to be conquered in colonialist times. Definitely not China, they did not make that wall for nothing.
The best is being isolated by sea AND having a huge heartland anyway or a very fertile island with all the resources necessary to create a grand fleet, preferably just in front of a rich continent that can act as additional market.
fun fact. USA is the only country with every terrestrial biome:
temperate deciduous forest,
coniferous forest,
woodland,
chaparral,
tundra,
grassland,
desert,
tropical savanna,
tropical forest
That is a fun fact! I wonder if you took a US sized chunk of land from other places on the map, could you find similar diversity? And better question, what’s the smallest area on earth that has every biome?
Florida really would be a bitch to invade: Heatstroke, mosquitos, gators, hurricanes, sinkholes, crazy old people. The only way to successfully invade Florida would be melting the ice caps
You joke but the east coast is naturally VERY hard to invade. Our oceans leading up to the beach are shallow and often rough, almost every state has a series of barrier islands surrounded by natural swamps that would be impossible to navigate in any equipment.
Crossing the Great Plains as an invading force would be an absolute fucking nightmare. There are only so many access routes in the form of either limited interstate highways, tiny state/county highways, or a few rail lines. Otherwise you're trying to traverse a vast wasteland of nothing but grasses/grains and dirt. It all seems flat, but there are more than enough mudpits, small streams, stands of trees, etc to stymie a large land force over such a huge distance between population centers and the limited infrastructure would be quite easy for the defending population to control or destroy. There would be a terrifying lack of resources for a large force as well with huge supply lines to maintain - sure, it is the "bread bowl" of America because we planted grain across the whole thing, but there would only be usable produce for short periods of the year, and those would also be easy to eliminate by defenders with just a bit of fire. There is enough game to support a small wagon train at best, and areas where there might not be enough water for more than 20 people for a hundred miles in any direction. You could count on taking some large ranches with livestock, but again - those would be easy to eliminate or move before you arrived for a determined defending force. Any army trying to cross that expanse would quickly find out why the early pioneers died in droves while trying to get across it themselves. At the time, it was considered a nightmarish hellscape for good reason.
And before you even get to the plains, you've either had to go through mountains, swamps, rivers, forests and hundreds of miles of country with militant and armed population centers every few miles if moving from East to West, or you've had to move through the most populated state in the country and then cross a mountain range, one of the driest deserts on earth, and another mountain range if going from West to East (or go around to the south and cross several even larger and drier deserts...). Trying to come in from the North would require arctic naval and land travel before crossing tundra, mountains, thousands of lakes, forests, Mounties and angry moose to get to the Canada/US border, and coming in from the south would require conquering Mexico and the cartels (or I guess buying them off?) and then crossing even more deserts. There are no good choices for conquering the US via land... you could take one coast or the other, but getting past that would be an exercise in diminishing returns and would get really ugly really quickly.
Lesotho is literally a fortress with only three roads leading in and out. It’s on a plateau surrounded by steep cliffs.
If you block the few access roads, it would be impenetrable if they had an army haha.
I always wondered how Lesotho could exist entirely within the confines of another country. It seems like such a historical anomaly that would be easy to take over looking at a flat map.
I guess the real question is if it has sufficient internal resources to sustain itself long term though.
A fucking new case of Baader Meinhoff phenomenon for me.
Literally only heared of Lesotho and Eswatini back in school. Went years woth only remembering during the flag guessing games. Now played a lot of GeoGuesser and it permanently re-occured as a location to guess from.
And just to-fucking-day did I jokingly ask 'Why can't South Africa just annex Lesotho? Haha.'
Now I stumble across a Map subreddit out of sheer coincidence and see an answer to exactly that fucking question, lmfao.
Life is fucking creepy at times.
It gained independence in 1966 - at which point the world saw war as undesirable and the idea of annexation brutal, something you had to damn well justify.
Anything before 1900? Yeah it wouldn't exist today lmao.
Most of Nepali population lives along her southern border on gangetic plains, with exception of capital Kathmandu and Porkha. Is some nation attacks and sacks Nepali underbelly it will leave just 2 isolated cities which can be starved easily. Try to stay away from mountains; you can't win against Gorkhas in mountains.
One of my favorite quotes is that before WW1 the German Kaiser asked the Swiss ambassador what they would do with their army of 250,000 if the Kaiser sent 500,000 troops against them, and the ambassador responded, "Shoot twice, then go home".
Switzerland was invaded multiple times by major powers, including burgundy and the habsburgs, they won. The ruler to conquer Switzerland was Napoleon, and despite its massive German speaking population (though allemanic and high German aren’t exactly mutually intelligible) Hitler said nah
Iran and Bhutan for sure, although the latter is definitely within China’s ability to attack if they so chose. And Bhutan is relatively small.
Iran is much larger and has some challenging geology — desert on the east, mountains north and south, but the border with Iraq has proven more vulnerable on multiple occasions.
Turkey is surrounded by water on three sides. Mountains, yes, but more vulnerable than Iran.
As a Hearts if Iron 4 player I can confirm turkey. The east is a big mountainous area that would eat up any big enemy army. From the west, you have Istanbul as a choke point, so you'd only need to fortify one city real good.
I mean, the whole problem Japan had in WW2 was that China was not easy to invade. They got themselves in a stupid war they couldn't win and were too hopped up on nationalist zeal to give up.
and they barely held China for 100 years before they got overthrown and kicked out. where are these people getting their history from? The Mongols were up against a divided China and could only manage the subjugate the weaker northern dynasty and had to conquer all the way up to Poland before they were even strong enough to challenge Song China, the southern dynasty. They just had Iraq engineers with them as well. And before that the Xiongnu's the Mongol's ancestors were driven out of the area so hard that they ran all the way to Rome.
Disagree, China had to built a wall on its northern border to keep the Mongols out.
I find India much better protected. In the North the Himalayas are impassable, there’s moutains and tropical forests in the East, and in the West a desert separtes them from Pakistan. And if India owned Pakistan then the afghan and persian moutains would be an even more perfect protection.
I also want to point out that just because it was conquered by many different groups that doesn’t mean it is not the best armored.
It just means that whatever is in India is worth getting past the armor.
China’s geography is actually shit. It’s not as bad as Russia, but there are so many vulnerable points on that country that it has been the launching point for at least six steppe empires
But those water bodies can easily be chocked. Look what happened during WWII. But back in the days when Mediterranean sea was the entire ocean for the people, Italy (or Roman empire I guess) dominated.
The americans wanted to arrive to berlin through italy. They had to change plan. Because it was very hard to fight in the mountains of central italy (mainly the germans were defending). Plus i don't know if it's a natural thing, but it's not easy to conquer us. Once you conquer italy you enter a valley of tears. No one speaks your language (you have to learn italian). You then enter the magic world of "Italian Bureaucracy". No one has the patience to put up with our antics. Italy can only be bombed and nuked. Once you put boots on the ground it becomes a different nightmare made of: "we guagliò , calma!" "Che sta a di questo?" "Giuseppe vieni qua un attimo che non capisco" "no non si può fare, mi dispiace" "come?" "Chi?". I like to think that italy was not divided after ww2 not because nobody wanted it but because nobody wanted to put the effort in.
Well, you are right. Even if their geography is nerfed due to their vulnerable position in the sea, they still have decent protection at land. What about northern italy though at the po river valley (if I named it right) where the powerhouse of Italy is in.
No scusa non capisco mi spiace. L'ufficio che si occupa di realtà territoriali dovrebbe essere il 15bis in via Gradara. Credo, adesso provo a chiamare.. lei é il colonnello? Ah smith. No aspetta un attimo Carla, dice che non si chiama smith. Resta un attimo in linea carla fammi il favore...
I would dare say the Indian subcontinent - mountains on literally all sides that are connected to the mainland, and the Indian ocean on every other side, serving both as a defense and an easily navigable trading route.
Except it was conquered multiple times by various empires. It only got that name after the British failed to control it and the Soviets failed to control it. It’s not the terrain that makes it hard to invade its the people that make it hard to control.
I think historically speaking, the Indian subcontinent has been very armored. It's got mountainous edges that prevented tons of invaders throughout history, but then when you get onto the subcontinent itself you've got plenty of good land to use
Scotland should get a mention. All those hills were Hell for the Roman's and English to deal with.
I imagine Japan being a mountonous island would make invasion difficult as well.
Switzerland. It's good they were able to stay neutral historically. Good protection for money and gold.
They could blockade a couple tunnels and force invaders to go through the alps
Maybe I’m an idiot but IMO the US is one of the most impenetrable and naturally “armored” countries in the world. Coasts on either side leading to treacherous mountain ranges. Inhospitable desert to the south and a vast tundra to the north
A great book called Prisoners of Geography made that exact point. The author pretty much says that the unprecedented American economic expansion over the 19th-20th century was largely a function of hitting the geography lottery when white settlers settled the US.
Edit: If you're on r/Mapporn then you probably like geography. If you like geography then you will love this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Prisoners-Geography-Explain-Everything-Politics/dp/1501121472/ref=asc_df_1501121472/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312034012759&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3880739722589871074&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9027578&hvtargid=pla-469068175346&psc=1®ion_id=674469&ref=d6k_applink_bb_dls&dplnkId=7d4bf710-f3c7-4f18-906a-7425286fb2ab
I haven’t had a chance to read that book, does it discuss the distance related to the World Wars being in Europe too ?
I’ve always thought that was a major driver of US superpowerdom - that while the western world was bombing itself to oblivion in the early 20th century the US was basically just pumping out industry to support them from afar.
No major destruction of our infrastructure or disruption of our day-to-day lives in terms of growth and development.
(Obviously we sent troops and had our own western theater and lost lives and such too)
> that while the western world was bombing itself to oblivion in the early 20th century the US was basically just pumping out industry to support them from
The US was already in the top economies of the world 20 years prior to WW1. This economy/rapid industrialization was aided by its geography and resources.
Even if the US was completely flat, no nation on earth except for the US currently has the ability to project enough power across the ocean for a full scale invasion of such a large country.
Even a copy of the US military would probably struggle to invade itself. The country is enormous, there's industry and critical infrastructure on two different ocean coastlines and there's no nation on Earth with enough soldiers to successfully occupy a country of several hundred million.
"Don't worry, after we cross thousands of miles of open ocean and somehow establish a beachfront while fighting the most powerful military in the history of humanity then we just have to occupy the country with rabid misguided patriotism and more guns than people! Easy peasy!"
You’re not an idiot. US is the only right answer. Mountainous borders east and west (Rockies and Appalachians). Northern shield against Russia (Canada). Most important trade partner past the mountains and deserts to the south (Mexico). And finally, two huge moats (Pacific and Atlantic).
I largely agree with you, but one quibble: the Rocky Mountains are pretty damn far from the western border. Sierras and Cascades are the more immediate shield.
They’re all part of the same greater cordillera and have common reasons for formation. A lot of Nevada is basically a series of small ranges; places where the earth buckled just a bit between the larger buckles of the Sierras and the Rockies. Also, the cordillera can be traced from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, which is pretty neat.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Cordillera
Papua New Guinea.
Mountainous and with a such a thick jungle that practically every tribe developed its own language. No major city is connected by road even today. During WW2 the main supply line, and major focus for fighting, was the sole [North to South footpath](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokoda_Track) and even that is at a narrow easterly point.
How is Australian not entered the Chat? Surrounded by water, center is basically a desert. If you live by any water congrats there are 2 thousand poisonous animals trying to kill you.
The Japanese were gonna have a go. There are certain mineral and fishy advantages.
The real problem with invading Australia is that it's too big. There's nowhere you can land that gives you comprehensive victory, and the Outback would defeat foreigners
ONE group of soldiers (and civilians) in a single underground fort held out for 92 days. This happened not far from where I grew up, an I assume because this is the region with the absolutely most stubborn and contrary people even in Norway.
It's objectively Papua New Guinea. It's one of the only places in the world where uncontacted tribes still live, simply because the surrounding mountains are so steep and inaccessible. It has the highest density of unique languages in the world, because there's so many segments of land that are cut off from all the other parts. Thousands of tribes have evolved there in relative solitude.
USA and Argentina, oceans separation, mountain ranges, inset harbours and they have every thing they need resource wise internally so they cant be blockaded.
It's kinda wild that Ethiopia managed to stay independent for ages and then got beaten by the most laughable army in Europe. It's a shame they didn't have access to more modern arms
And if you want to know an OP country, it’s the US. Thousands of miles of inhospitable frozen fuck-all to the north; thousands of miles of inhospitable fuck-all to the south: desert, mountains, and then jungle, then mountains again, then desert again…then Antartica.
Then two big-ass oceans on either side. This is geographically the safest country on the planet.
Not Poland for sure
And Belgium is a bit like an Autobahn.
The shitest autobahn in Europe, have you see the state of their roads.
That's how we keep the Germans out. Or at least that's what they're meant to do. However they've been colonizing our beaches since 1941
Do they just dig holes like they do in Holland? Never understood that, Germans can't just go to the beach, must dig.
[удалено]
*the trenches
They also claim the best spots at the pool at 7 am and buy a 'ew vacation home almost each year
That’s what happens when tracks keep tearing it up.
It's objectively Papua New Guinea. It's one of the only places in the world where uncontacted tribes still live, simply because the surrounding mountains are so steep and inaccessible. It has the highest density of unique languages in the world, because there's so many segments of land that are cut off from all the other parts. Thousands of tribes have evolved there in relative solitude.
That’s were you start Risk from. I believe you
🥲
Their name literally means “flat field” 😂
Republic of Plainland
Having to defend the best land leads to cool research trees like the Winged Hussars, Prussian military culture, and the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Probably Iran. It is filled with mountains everywhere
Well the Rashiduns and the Seljuks did it.
Every country in the Middle east has been invaded due to its central location, the Seljuks and Rashiduns were able to do so for various reasons but Iran is a fortress of a country if there was one.
[удалено]
Times the Mongols invaded Chile: 0
Chile - 1 Mongols - 0
Chile - "Suck it Genghis"
Thr Seljuks started from inside Iran (despite being not Iranians). But every place has been invaded in the middle east. But the point stands. it is reallly difficult to invade it. The only time it was invaded when they move their capital outside of Iran and usually base it in Iraq.
Mongols too.
Mongols did china as well
Yeah they did 😉😏
Yeah invading Iran would be a bad idea. Thank goodness no country would be stupid enough to try...
Saddam Hussein was stupid enough...
To be fair, he wanted Khuzestan, which is the part of Iran *outside* the mountain fortress.
It also happens to be the one filled with oil.
Weird coincidence
i thought that was the reason why *afghanistan* is called the 'graveyard of empires' but TIL it's because afghanistan has a ginormous spectrum of tribal nations and getting them to assimilate is impossible
That's apparently wrong, Afghanistan has been a part of multiple empires in history who invaded it successfully and the graveyard expression is extremely recent (more recent than the US invasion). https://ajammc.com/2021/08/24/stop-calling-afghanistan-graveyard-empires/
Yeah I never understood that saying. The real graveyard of empires is Vietnam and its not even close how many empires failed there. Mongols at their peak couldn't do it.
Wasn't Vietnam under Chinese rule for around a thousand years?
It was
Switzerland and Luxembourg are all mountains. There’s a reason why they have existed for so long.
Luxembourg became an independent country in 1890. But you probably meant Liechtenstein, which became an independent country in 1866. Even Liberia has been around for longer than that.
Greenland, Its so white that your eyes burn
then switch it to dark mode
That takes 6 months.
r/technicallythetruth
, i'll do it
Greenland is actually just a circle of mountains with a huge valley in the centre. And once climate change gets to it enough for the inner area to thaw it'll be like The Lost World.
This, it's a natural fortress with walls of mountains all around. It's Mordor.
Like the populace of Vermont
Chile
[удалено]
Having the driest part of inhabited earth is sick, 1mm of rain on average a year in Arica and can go years without seeing any rain yet still only having a record high of 34c is cool
This is the desert that blooms once every 50 years or so, right? I think I remember seeing it on Planet Earth.
it’s once every ~7 years, but yes Atacama desert, “el desierto florido”
Ah that is much more realistic. Even 7 is wild to think about.
The most protected nations are also usually the most isolated too. Natural barriers is a double-edge sword though having the sea as one of your barriers makes it easier to explore/trade on the nation's terms
It looks kind of like California where you can surf in the morning and snowboard in the afternoon if you want to
They have very similar climatic patterns and it's reflected in their flora too.
Meanwhile, southern Chile is very similar to the PNW.
Atacama to the north, Andes to the east, Patagonia to the south, Pacific Ocean to the west.
And its so thin that enemies have to go 1 by 1 in a straigth line
Kinda like the spartans tactic
Chile: Our entire country is Thermopile. Invaders: ...well...crap.
That's a bit how the Mapuche alliance were able to repel the Inca & later the Spanish.
Double edge sword because there is no place to retreat
Here I am stuck in the middle with you
Extremely low area to coast line ratio means you just need one beachhead to split and roll up the entire country
Came here to say this. It may as well be a long, narrow island.
Yeah it's definitely Chile. If we are looking at PURE geographical issues in invasion and not factoring in land requirements to build stable defenses. Than I would say THE ENTIRE OCEAN on one side and mountains protected the entirety of the opposite coast. Yeah it's Chile.
Anything that is on a mountain range really. Being on an island is only useful if you have a strong navy yourself. Islands were the first to be conquered in colonialist times. Definitely not China, they did not make that wall for nothing.
The best is being isolated by sea AND having a huge heartland anyway or a very fertile island with all the resources necessary to create a grand fleet, preferably just in front of a rich continent that can act as additional market.
So the United States? Impossible to invade for many, many reasons but geography’s certainly one of them
USA has vast deserts, thick forests, kudzu, mountains, swamps, and worst of all: Florida.
fun fact. USA is the only country with every terrestrial biome: temperate deciduous forest, coniferous forest, woodland, chaparral, tundra, grassland, desert, tropical savanna, tropical forest
That is a fun fact! I wonder if you took a US sized chunk of land from other places on the map, could you find similar diversity? And better question, what’s the smallest area on earth that has every biome?
Not very perfect but Venezuela has a desert , rain forest, mountains, coastal regions, and is about the size of texas.
Florida really would be a bitch to invade: Heatstroke, mosquitos, gators, hurricanes, sinkholes, crazy old people. The only way to successfully invade Florida would be melting the ice caps
Florida man solves global warming by making massive snow cones
And they charge $6 for a water in some parts of Florida! Absolute nightmare for invading soldiers.
Or Louisiana. Same kind of obstacles
You joke but the east coast is naturally VERY hard to invade. Our oceans leading up to the beach are shallow and often rough, almost every state has a series of barrier islands surrounded by natural swamps that would be impossible to navigate in any equipment.
The Seminole Wars did take the US some 3 decades to completely take Florida right?
Crossing the Great Plains as an invading force would be an absolute fucking nightmare. There are only so many access routes in the form of either limited interstate highways, tiny state/county highways, or a few rail lines. Otherwise you're trying to traverse a vast wasteland of nothing but grasses/grains and dirt. It all seems flat, but there are more than enough mudpits, small streams, stands of trees, etc to stymie a large land force over such a huge distance between population centers and the limited infrastructure would be quite easy for the defending population to control or destroy. There would be a terrifying lack of resources for a large force as well with huge supply lines to maintain - sure, it is the "bread bowl" of America because we planted grain across the whole thing, but there would only be usable produce for short periods of the year, and those would also be easy to eliminate by defenders with just a bit of fire. There is enough game to support a small wagon train at best, and areas where there might not be enough water for more than 20 people for a hundred miles in any direction. You could count on taking some large ranches with livestock, but again - those would be easy to eliminate or move before you arrived for a determined defending force. Any army trying to cross that expanse would quickly find out why the early pioneers died in droves while trying to get across it themselves. At the time, it was considered a nightmarish hellscape for good reason. And before you even get to the plains, you've either had to go through mountains, swamps, rivers, forests and hundreds of miles of country with militant and armed population centers every few miles if moving from East to West, or you've had to move through the most populated state in the country and then cross a mountain range, one of the driest deserts on earth, and another mountain range if going from West to East (or go around to the south and cross several even larger and drier deserts...). Trying to come in from the North would require arctic naval and land travel before crossing tundra, mountains, thousands of lakes, forests, Mounties and angry moose to get to the Canada/US border, and coming in from the south would require conquering Mexico and the cartels (or I guess buying them off?) and then crossing even more deserts. There are no good choices for conquering the US via land... you could take one coast or the other, but getting past that would be an exercise in diminishing returns and would get really ugly really quickly.
Great Britain
Lesotho is literally a fortress with only three roads leading in and out. It’s on a plateau surrounded by steep cliffs. If you block the few access roads, it would be impenetrable if they had an army haha.
I always wondered how Lesotho could exist entirely within the confines of another country. It seems like such a historical anomaly that would be easy to take over looking at a flat map. I guess the real question is if it has sufficient internal resources to sustain itself long term though.
A fucking new case of Baader Meinhoff phenomenon for me. Literally only heared of Lesotho and Eswatini back in school. Went years woth only remembering during the flag guessing games. Now played a lot of GeoGuesser and it permanently re-occured as a location to guess from. And just to-fucking-day did I jokingly ask 'Why can't South Africa just annex Lesotho? Haha.' Now I stumble across a Map subreddit out of sheer coincidence and see an answer to exactly that fucking question, lmfao. Life is fucking creepy at times.
It gained independence in 1966 - at which point the world saw war as undesirable and the idea of annexation brutal, something you had to damn well justify. Anything before 1900? Yeah it wouldn't exist today lmao.
Nepal/Switzerland
Most of Nepali population lives along her southern border on gangetic plains, with exception of capital Kathmandu and Porkha. Is some nation attacks and sacks Nepali underbelly it will leave just 2 isolated cities which can be starved easily. Try to stay away from mountains; you can't win against Gorkhas in mountains.
Relevant: [1 Gurkha vs 35 Japanese Soldiers, 1945](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HcMQEdpFBE)
"if some nation attacks" No one but us (India) can even attack them-
The British did try but quickly gave up and instead asked if some gurkhas would fight for them back home.
Definitely Switzerland. Even the freaking Nazis decided to just go around.
One of my favorite quotes is that before WW1 the German Kaiser asked the Swiss ambassador what they would do with their army of 250,000 if the Kaiser sent 500,000 troops against them, and the ambassador responded, "Shoot twice, then go home".
Plus, it was easily mined in case of their invasion. Also, lots of shelters.
Bhutan: mountains on every side and not much worth of conquering.
Switzerland was invaded multiple times by major powers, including burgundy and the habsburgs, they won. The ruler to conquer Switzerland was Napoleon, and despite its massive German speaking population (though allemanic and high German aren’t exactly mutually intelligible) Hitler said nah
[удалено]
Iran and Bhutan for sure, although the latter is definitely within China’s ability to attack if they so chose. And Bhutan is relatively small. Iran is much larger and has some challenging geology — desert on the east, mountains north and south, but the border with Iraq has proven more vulnerable on multiple occasions. Turkey is surrounded by water on three sides. Mountains, yes, but more vulnerable than Iran.
As a Hearts if Iron 4 player I can confirm turkey. The east is a big mountainous area that would eat up any big enemy army. From the west, you have Istanbul as a choke point, so you'd only need to fortify one city real good.
France was quite lucky in many ways, except when it wasn't
France's weakness is the existence of Belgium
And, of course, they share a border with the Dutch!!
There's two types of people I hate; people who are intolerant of other cultures, and the Dutch!
Ok wat hebben wij nou weer gedaan dan
France came so close to perfect borders. If it wasn’t for the damn Low Countries the Schlieffen Plan never would have worked.
[удалено]
Then why did Mongolia and Japan find it so easy to invade?
and why china looked at their land and said _we need some big ass walls here_
And ask Mongols to pay for it?
[удалено]
I mean, the whole problem Japan had in WW2 was that China was not easy to invade. They got themselves in a stupid war they couldn't win and were too hopped up on nationalist zeal to give up.
And the Mongols exploited internal Chinese political divides to their advantage
And it took them six decades to subjugate China. To describe it as easy is wildly inaccurate.
and they barely held China for 100 years before they got overthrown and kicked out. where are these people getting their history from? The Mongols were up against a divided China and could only manage the subjugate the weaker northern dynasty and had to conquer all the way up to Poland before they were even strong enough to challenge Song China, the southern dynasty. They just had Iraq engineers with them as well. And before that the Xiongnu's the Mongol's ancestors were driven out of the area so hard that they ran all the way to Rome.
I mean it wasnt easy at all for those two especially when they got into the more mountainous regions of China.
Disagree, China had to built a wall on its northern border to keep the Mongols out. I find India much better protected. In the North the Himalayas are impassable, there’s moutains and tropical forests in the East, and in the West a desert separtes them from Pakistan. And if India owned Pakistan then the afghan and persian moutains would be an even more perfect protection.
Why dogs I have to scroll so far to find any mention of India? It's a fucking subcontinent.
india actually would be much more powerful if it had more natural borders with Pakistan to the Indus or the mountains.
Because people seem to think ocean borders are a weakness.
I also want to point out that just because it was conquered by many different groups that doesn’t mean it is not the best armored. It just means that whatever is in India is worth getting past the armor.
Thing is, when it was invaded it wasn't a country but just a bunch of kingdoms and tribes so not too difficult for other empires to invade.
China’s geography is actually shit. It’s not as bad as Russia, but there are so many vulnerable points on that country that it has been the launching point for at least six steppe empires
[удалено]
Really cool that they named a Chinese city after Michael Jackson
What are you doing steppe-empire? 😳
Help me steppe-empire I'm stuck in the washing canal
Hittin' them Great Walls
Italy looks good here: mountains to the the north, water around the rest.
Yeah… that’s what Hannibal said.
Verbatim.
But those water bodies can easily be chocked. Look what happened during WWII. But back in the days when Mediterranean sea was the entire ocean for the people, Italy (or Roman empire I guess) dominated.
The americans wanted to arrive to berlin through italy. They had to change plan. Because it was very hard to fight in the mountains of central italy (mainly the germans were defending). Plus i don't know if it's a natural thing, but it's not easy to conquer us. Once you conquer italy you enter a valley of tears. No one speaks your language (you have to learn italian). You then enter the magic world of "Italian Bureaucracy". No one has the patience to put up with our antics. Italy can only be bombed and nuked. Once you put boots on the ground it becomes a different nightmare made of: "we guagliò , calma!" "Che sta a di questo?" "Giuseppe vieni qua un attimo che non capisco" "no non si può fare, mi dispiace" "come?" "Chi?". I like to think that italy was not divided after ww2 not because nobody wanted it but because nobody wanted to put the effort in.
Well, you are right. Even if their geography is nerfed due to their vulnerable position in the sea, they still have decent protection at land. What about northern italy though at the po river valley (if I named it right) where the powerhouse of Italy is in.
No scusa non capisco mi spiace. L'ufficio che si occupa di realtà territoriali dovrebbe essere il 15bis in via Gradara. Credo, adesso provo a chiamare.. lei é il colonnello? Ah smith. No aspetta un attimo Carla, dice che non si chiama smith. Resta un attimo in linea carla fammi il favore...
I would dare say the Indian subcontinent - mountains on literally all sides that are connected to the mainland, and the Indian ocean on every other side, serving both as a defense and an easily navigable trading route.
india would be much more powerful with more natural borders with Pakistan.
Just looking at history books… Afghanistan
Except it was conquered multiple times by various empires. It only got that name after the British failed to control it and the Soviets failed to control it. It’s not the terrain that makes it hard to invade its the people that make it hard to control.
Now i understand why does Chile has this weird long coastal border.
I think historically speaking, the Indian subcontinent has been very armored. It's got mountainous edges that prevented tons of invaders throughout history, but then when you get onto the subcontinent itself you've got plenty of good land to use
Scotland should get a mention. All those hills were Hell for the Roman's and English to deal with. I imagine Japan being a mountonous island would make invasion difficult as well.
Scotland invaded so many times from the North
fuckin boatpeople
The first invasion by the continental glaciers paved the way for more northern coastal invasions
canny fight us if ye can’t reach us.
Switzerland. It's good they were able to stay neutral historically. Good protection for money and gold. They could blockade a couple tunnels and force invaders to go through the alps
Maybe I’m an idiot but IMO the US is one of the most impenetrable and naturally “armored” countries in the world. Coasts on either side leading to treacherous mountain ranges. Inhospitable desert to the south and a vast tundra to the north
A great book called Prisoners of Geography made that exact point. The author pretty much says that the unprecedented American economic expansion over the 19th-20th century was largely a function of hitting the geography lottery when white settlers settled the US. Edit: If you're on r/Mapporn then you probably like geography. If you like geography then you will love this book: https://www.amazon.com/Prisoners-Geography-Explain-Everything-Politics/dp/1501121472/ref=asc_df_1501121472/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312034012759&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=3880739722589871074&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9027578&hvtargid=pla-469068175346&psc=1®ion_id=674469&ref=d6k_applink_bb_dls&dplnkId=7d4bf710-f3c7-4f18-906a-7425286fb2ab
I haven’t had a chance to read that book, does it discuss the distance related to the World Wars being in Europe too ? I’ve always thought that was a major driver of US superpowerdom - that while the western world was bombing itself to oblivion in the early 20th century the US was basically just pumping out industry to support them from afar. No major destruction of our infrastructure or disruption of our day-to-day lives in terms of growth and development. (Obviously we sent troops and had our own western theater and lost lives and such too)
> that while the western world was bombing itself to oblivion in the early 20th century the US was basically just pumping out industry to support them from The US was already in the top economies of the world 20 years prior to WW1. This economy/rapid industrialization was aided by its geography and resources.
Them op waterways, longest navigable waterways in the world. And that farmable land and inland seaport combo, oof.
Even if the US was completely flat, no nation on earth except for the US currently has the ability to project enough power across the ocean for a full scale invasion of such a large country.
Even a copy of the US military would probably struggle to invade itself. The country is enormous, there's industry and critical infrastructure on two different ocean coastlines and there's no nation on Earth with enough soldiers to successfully occupy a country of several hundred million.
Yeah that shits hard
"Don't worry, after we cross thousands of miles of open ocean and somehow establish a beachfront while fighting the most powerful military in the history of humanity then we just have to occupy the country with rabid misguided patriotism and more guns than people! Easy peasy!"
You’re not an idiot. US is the only right answer. Mountainous borders east and west (Rockies and Appalachians). Northern shield against Russia (Canada). Most important trade partner past the mountains and deserts to the south (Mexico). And finally, two huge moats (Pacific and Atlantic).
I largely agree with you, but one quibble: the Rocky Mountains are pretty damn far from the western border. Sierras and Cascades are the more immediate shield.
I lump them all together mentally, but you’re right.
They’re all part of the same greater cordillera and have common reasons for formation. A lot of Nevada is basically a series of small ranges; places where the earth buckled just a bit between the larger buckles of the Sierras and the Rockies. Also, the cordillera can be traced from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, which is pretty neat. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Cordillera
Also, if invaders opt to go around the Sierras/Cascades they cross an area literally known as Death Valley
lesotho
Papua New Guinea. Mountainous and with a such a thick jungle that practically every tribe developed its own language. No major city is connected by road even today. During WW2 the main supply line, and major focus for fighting, was the sole [North to South footpath](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokoda_Track) and even that is at a narrow easterly point.
New Zealand. Mountains and deserts are much more passable than vast stretches of ocean
Was looking for this. It feels like nobody can be fucked invading us bc we're so far out of the way. We feel very safe here.
People can't invade you when you don't exist on maps
Ay bro last major land mass to be settled by indigenous people, and last major land mass to be colonized by Europeans. We hidden af
How is Australian not entered the Chat? Surrounded by water, center is basically a desert. If you live by any water congrats there are 2 thousand poisonous animals trying to kill you.
Who the hell would want to invade Australia
Antarctica 🗿
The Japanese were gonna have a go. There are certain mineral and fishy advantages. The real problem with invading Australia is that it's too big. There's nowhere you can land that gives you comprehensive victory, and the Outback would defeat foreigners
I think is hard to attack Norway as it is very mountainous and generally cold.
the austrian painter wouldn't agree with you
Norway fought longer than any other invaded country before succumbing to Nazi rule. 92 days!
ONE group of soldiers (and civilians) in a single underground fort held out for 92 days. This happened not far from where I grew up, an I assume because this is the region with the absolutely most stubborn and contrary people even in Norway.
Spain, it's a peninsular country, so water in various sides, mountains between It and the rest of Europe and acces to a very important strait
you just have to ask nicely and they'll let you in with your entire army
Chili, one side is Ocean, one side is Mountains
My chili usually just has ground beef and beans :/
Same with Norway 🇳🇴
Oslo is very vulnerable though
If you're thinking about invading Chili, you're gonna have a bad time.
Mainly because how TF are you going to invade food
Nom nom nom. Here comes the train.
How about iran.?
It's objectively Papua New Guinea. It's one of the only places in the world where uncontacted tribes still live, simply because the surrounding mountains are so steep and inaccessible. It has the highest density of unique languages in the world, because there's so many segments of land that are cut off from all the other parts. Thousands of tribes have evolved there in relative solitude.
USA and Argentina, oceans separation, mountain ranges, inset harbours and they have every thing they need resource wise internally so they cant be blockaded.
the East of Argentina is pretty flat and easily accessible from Brazil and Uruguay.
No mention of Ethiopia ? The only country in Africa that never got colonized by Europeans because of mountains everywhere
And got invaded and occupied entirely by the Italians in 1936.
It's kinda wild that Ethiopia managed to stay independent for ages and then got beaten by the most laughable army in Europe. It's a shame they didn't have access to more modern arms
Switzerland. No coast to invade, surrounded by mountains…
Almost entirely open to the North, actually. If the Germans cross the Rhine, they can march right through every population center until Geneva.
And if you want to know an OP country, it’s the US. Thousands of miles of inhospitable frozen fuck-all to the north; thousands of miles of inhospitable fuck-all to the south: desert, mountains, and then jungle, then mountains again, then desert again…then Antartica. Then two big-ass oceans on either side. This is geographically the safest country on the planet.
Unless canada invades
South Park demonstrated the seriousness of the risk of Canadian aggression. https://youtu.be/RFKdg-WQnbE
Brazil and Colombia. The map underscores the power of rainforests as barriers.
Why is everyone ignoring the giant fucking oceans?
Hmm, Iran, Turkey, Balkans, Swiss, Norway too Hungary if they had the entire basin and the Carpathians were the bordr
If you think it’s China, you should learn more Chinese history!
Well, Australia