Just a sidenote, Puerto Rico shouldn't necessarily be included in the list of countries without armies because 1.) They are a territory of the United States and 2.) Puerto Rico has a National Guard which functions almost like a standing army.

@perfsev

Жыл бұрын

They also have a small state guard on top of the national guard. (State is in the name). Only a few actual states even have these at all.

@whoishim2998

Жыл бұрын

Yeah lol their army would be the US military….

@thescotchirishman3373

Жыл бұрын

@@perfsev it stops when the "state" recognizes itself as a territory. And when the majority of the population votes for statehood. (In the American context of statehood not literal) in fact the island runs a deficit so its whole infrastructure or lack their of is totally reliant on the USA.

@jakeorb771

Жыл бұрын

Another Sidenote: Costa Rica also has a population of ~5 million. and disbanded their millitary shortly after WWII. Making Costa Rica one of the largest countries with no army, and certainly larger than iceland.

@TRDPaul

Жыл бұрын

The majority of "countries" on that list were just territories of other countries

Iceland is also extremely important to Nato even without a standing army. They are the perfect layover and airbase from North America to Europe in case an armed conflict would ever require North American troops to be sent to Europe. And vice versa, it would be equally useful for powers trying to attack the North American continent by air from the Atlantic, in case airways through the arctic circle are not open.

@TheLastAngryMan01

Жыл бұрын

Indeed. The UK and then the US annexed them during World War II as Iceland was too important from a geostrategic perspective to allow it to fall under German control.

@chinguunerdenebadrakh7022

Жыл бұрын

@@TheLastAngryMan01 annex is a specific term that announces a previously foreign territory is now your own. WW2 was the case of occupation, not annexation.

@TheLastAngryMan01

Жыл бұрын

@@chinguunerdenebadrakh7022 Well thank you, Captain Pedantic.

@Jay_Johnson

Жыл бұрын

@@TheLastAngryMan01 That is not just a semantic difference those are very different things.

@iche9373

Жыл бұрын

@@TheLastAngryMan01 Captain Ignorance, that's not pedantic. An annexation is always an act of imperial aggression against another sovereign country and thus at the same time against the inviolability of our unipolar world order (UN).

"Iceland are by far the largest country without their own military" Costa Rica: "Am I a joke to you?"

@ShadowTani

Жыл бұрын

Largest by landmass, not by population.

@livonian_knight9351

Жыл бұрын

@@ShadowTani i hope he meant that

@icelandinreallife2042

Жыл бұрын

@@ShadowTani Greenland is also listed there at the beginning so... But they are still a part of the Kingdom of Denmark so, perhaps Iceland is the largest sovereign country to not have a military? Idk.

@owenlindkvist5355

Жыл бұрын

Yes. Costa Rica, like all Central and South American countries are a joke.

@EstebanVicenzi

Жыл бұрын

@@ShadowTani technically correct, the best kind of correct... did you include territorial waters from Isla del Coco? Are you refering to terrritory or landmass?

Costa Rica and Panama are not micro-nations yet they still don't have an army. I would argue that it's even more impressive in their case given their population (5M for Costa Rica, 4.5M for Panama) and their regional environment (tensions, crime, drugs, land border with unstable nations, etc...), whereas Iceland has a really small population (400,000) and no land border with anyone.

@martinschlegel1823

Жыл бұрын

But both don't have "nothing". Having or not having military can be somewhat muddy. Japan doesn't call it's army an army but something like territorial defense forces. Costa Rica a) is part of the US and b) has a National Guard which basically is an army. I mean, the size difference does matter, US, Germany, France, China, all of them probably could in theory invade Iceland just with their police force without using any actual military (well, maybe not because the police has no landing boats but if they somehow got there they could...). But I think for many peacefull nations without aggressive neighbours and with good relationships to more powerfull nations, you can nowadays reduce military to "just a coast guard" like Iceland in the case that you're an island or some sort of border guards if you have land borders. You don't need aircraft carriers and strategic bombers if you don't plan on projecting military power into far away lands. Does that reduced military still count as an army? Does that depend on how you want to call it?

@ouafallouz

Жыл бұрын

@@martinschlegel1823 Did you really just say that Costa Rica is part of the US? 🤣

@cristrguacl

Жыл бұрын

@@martinschlegel1823 You mixed up Costa Rica with Puerto Rico there.

@theminuskai7453

Жыл бұрын

I am from Costa Rica, i can tell you the reason we dont have an army is because one of our previous presidents a long time ago abolished the army because he was scared of a coup by the military, since then no one else has bothered to remake the army cuz that money is simply better used elsewhere and also because we havent been ruled by any warmonger dictator unlike our neighbor to the north Nicaragua I dunno why panama doesnt have tho

@audetnicolas

Жыл бұрын

Panama has a population of over 4 million, Costa Rica has 5 million ... In a sense Iceland is the micro nation

Wait why did you say the one exception is Iceland when you put Costa Rica on your list, and they have a much higher population lol

@mnxs

Жыл бұрын

And Panama. Neither of the two fits the criteria of a micronation, nor are they dependencies.

@Wustenfuchs109

Жыл бұрын

@@mnxs True, but their "non-military" standing units (various national guard, coast guard and police forces) are quite militarized themselves and probably stronger than a few actual militaries of the world. That is why I don't think they would qualify. Sure, you don't call them "military", but that's just nomenclature. I mean, US National Guard is also not a branch of the military officially, yet you can bet there are very few actual militaries in the world that US National Guard can't defeat. In short, just because something is not specifically called a military, does not mean that it isn't one. And vice versa.

@perfsev

Жыл бұрын

Puerto Rico is a weird choice too, ignoring that they're US citizens with the US military, they do actually have their own small military, and a national guard unit.

@wihenao

Жыл бұрын

it's called eurocentrism. The assumption that only Europe matters, specially since this is a European channel.

@wihenao

Жыл бұрын

@@Wustenfuchs109 Well. It's on the list, so it certainly qualifies.

Because we have effectively weaponized passive aggressiveness to the extent that we defeated an empire in the Cod Wars.

@anxiousearth680

Жыл бұрын

Australia take note. This is how you win wars against animals.

@martinfalkjohansson5204

Жыл бұрын

@@anxiousearth680 It was about cod, not against cod.

@anxiousearth680

Жыл бұрын

@@martinfalkjohansson5204 It was tongue in cheek but I also didn't know that, so thanks.

@WineZ22

Жыл бұрын

Is that the official name of the iceland - UK conflict related to fishery? If not, I am disappointed 😞 Cod Wars is definitely a good name for a conflict. Just like the Emu War 😅

@hermannbridde2118

Жыл бұрын

I still want to give Britain credit for an awesome answer when asked if they lost the cod wars "we didn't loose, we left!" :D

Iceland: has no army Also Iceland: casually beats the British 3 times in wars over some fish

@theDavitos

Жыл бұрын

strong coast guards and sailors with viking blood tend to know about to fight better in sea battle then royal navy.. just one person died in them three wars that was accidental then two ships from each sides rammed together and lot of war damage as icelandic cut nets from uk fishing vessels and pretty warships got rammed into , it didnt help either that uk like their tea time so icelandic did bother them most at that times haha.

@chriswarr3676

Жыл бұрын

@@RandomnessTube. he doesn't know if he's British, Irish or Scottish.

@chriswarr3676

Жыл бұрын

Hardly a war 😂.

@TaurusTheCrazyBull

Жыл бұрын

Ekki reyna að taka fiskinn okkar, við vinnum í vatninu

@ShivamGupta-sr9zf

Жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣

Costa Rica is famous for having no army and has a population of over 5 million.

@MC-yt1uv

Жыл бұрын

It depends on how you define the military. Costa Rica has the Fuerza Pública de Costa Rica, which is a gendarmerie, which is kind of like a militarized police force. They perform things like border security for Costa Rica. Iceland has less of a military than Costa Rica.

@JustBen81

Жыл бұрын

Costa Rica is even displayed in the list of countries with no military 0:50. Some of the more populous territories in the list aren't independent countries (e.G. Puerto Rico and Hong Kong), but in Addition to Costa Rica there are 3 more countries with a higher population than Island on the list: Mauritius, Panama and the Solomon Islands. So Iceland isn't even close to be the largest Country without a Military.

@Jay_Johnson

Жыл бұрын

@@JustBen81 Largest by land area obviously

@JustBen81

Жыл бұрын

@@adamwaterhouse corrected it.

@gandreoliva

Жыл бұрын

@@MC-yt1uv False: The Fuerza Pública has no defense capabilities (no tanks, no heavy weapons, no combat planes, no armed ships), so it is not a militarized police force. Border security is performed by the Policía de Fronteras, which again, has no heavy weapons. In Costa Rica, only 3 small groups, part of 3 different police forces and under the command of 3 different institutions have "tactical" capabilities (intervening in drug trafficking cases, for example). They can intervene in small, dangerous situations, but they can't defend the country from a foreign attack.

An Icelander here :) One minor thing I'd like to add. We have a heavily armed SWAT team with around 50 strong.

@GeorgeVenturi

Жыл бұрын

more like 50 weak.

@brianjonker510

Жыл бұрын

IMO Iceland should make a military contribution to NATO/UN. My idea is something along the line of 100 to 200 people equipped and trained as a field hospital or as MP's

Costarica and Panama, countries much larger than Iceland don't have their armies. So, it's not true, that Iceland is the biggest country without armed forces.

@explodethebomb

Жыл бұрын

Yep, and several of those on the list aren't countries. Really surprising that Puerto Rico doesn't have its own military... (except it kind of does in the form of their national guard)

@seanolaocha940

Жыл бұрын

@@explodethebomb Puerto Rico is a US territory so the US military is it's military.

@explodethebomb

Жыл бұрын

@@seanolaocha940 Yes, obviously, but TLDR listed them as a country without a military

@rodrigovegamoreno3211

Жыл бұрын

Costa Rica has about 4.5M inhabitants; 10x bigger population than Iceland

@DanielGalimidi

Жыл бұрын

TLDR doing shoddy work as usual.

Mauritius has a population of 1.3m - over 3 times greater than Iceland. Costa Rica has a population of 5.2m - about 13 times greater than Iceland.

@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am

Жыл бұрын

And Hong Kong has a larger population than both of those combined... I think they should've compared area.

One British soldier died during the invasion of iceland (from suicide)

Iceland might not have military, but no one dares invading because they have Thor (the mountain from GOT)

@marsveinsson2295

Жыл бұрын

Fuck little gauge boy. We got hard folks around here.

Almost half of the countries you list as countries without armies are not sovereign - Aruba, BIOT, Cayman Islands, Cook Islands, Curacao, Falkland Islands, Faroe Islands, French Polynesia, Greenland, Hong Kong, Macau, Montserrat, New Caledonia, Niue, Puerto Rico, Sint Maarten, and Svalbard are all dependencies in some sense. Why didn't you also list, for instance, Åland Islands when you were at it (a demilitarized zone with some autonomy belonging to Finland)? Furthermore, several of the actual countries you list are much bigger than Iceland: Costa Rica at 5 million, Panama at 4 million, Mauritius at 1.3 million. Even some of the dependencies listed are (much) bigger than Iceland - Hong Kong (7 million), Puerto Rico (3 million) and Macau (600 000).

@jolindbe

Жыл бұрын

Furthermore, that BIOT is listed is quite bizarre, it is basically a US/UK military base in the middle of the Indian Ocean - how does that not count as having an army?

Who needs an army when you have fire-breathing dragons?

@michaegi4717

Жыл бұрын

Hence energy becomes more and more important, this fire breathing dragons might attract some bad guys in the future.

A big reason to why it works is because Iceland is strategically incredibly important, so Nato basically has to agree to let them stay even without an army. The strategic benefits from controlling the GIUK gap is simply too big to throw away.

@jwil4286

Жыл бұрын

I mean, we let Turkey off the hook for even worse things (ask Armenia or Kurdistan [or the Kurdish people] what I mean) for the same reason, so it isn’t unprecedented.

@Sahtoovi

Жыл бұрын

@@jwil4286 Yeah, for Iceland it isn't weird in the slightest since Iceland doesn't exactly have a history of genocide and human rights violations like Turkey does.

@jwil4286

Жыл бұрын

@@Sahtoovi true. My point is that NATO letting countries off the hook bc they’re strategically important isn’t abnormal.

@pedrorequio5515

Жыл бұрын

The reality for Iceland is Simple. You dont have an army, nor have the resources for one, however they are strategically important. They could never have credible force, in the Alliance. But for the Alliance to use their territory it makes them a target because they no longer are Neutral, so the trade off is that they have to protect them, there are some American troops there and they have a deal with Norway that some of their F35 go to Iceland for safe skys operations.

@owenlindkvist5355

Жыл бұрын

Well, they are also too busy committing child rape and incest. Priorities.

It is a tiny Island in the middle of the ocean that gets really bloody cold in the winter. You dont need a army when your location and the logistics of invasion forms such a potent defense.

@Gardstyle35

Жыл бұрын

many nations would take iceland over if it wasnt protected by its allies

@bababababababa6124

Жыл бұрын

Honestly, I thought it was obvious why Iceland doesn’t have an army… tldr says Iceland is the largest country without an army even though Panama and Costa Rica were on their list, I think both of those would be a far more interesting video to watch considering they’re in a position where you’d think an army would be necessary

@hannesproductions4302

Жыл бұрын

@Alfred L.B. But 80% of Iceland is the higland desert and 2/3 of the population live on 1% of the Islands area. I’m saying the liveable size of Iceland is like 10% of the real size. The farmland isn’t of great quality so you couldn’t support a huge population.

@ericstorm6582

Жыл бұрын

"Bloody cold" not really

@bababababababa6124

Жыл бұрын

@@ericstorm6582 in what universe is Iceland not cold 🤔😂😂

They’ve got fishermen who can win wars anyway so what’s the point

@johnleake5657

Жыл бұрын

If you're refering to the Cod Wars, Iceland does have an armed coastguard.

@Live.Laugh.Lobotomy

Жыл бұрын

@@johnleake5657 nice to know I don’t care though

I noticed that you had the Falkland Islands on your list of countries without militaries. This is wrong on two counts. Firstly, the Falklands isn't a country, it's a 'British Overseas Territory', which means it's part of, and has it's foreign affairs managed by, the United Kingdom , but has internal self-government. Secondly, it DOES have an 'army': the Falkland Islands Defence Force (about 100 light infantry recruited from the islands and funded by the local government). The same is true of Montserrat and the Cayman Islands.

There is a Netflix series "Entrapped", that shows a couple of Icelandic officers investigating murders on a small town. Very interesting. They don't carry weapons and everytime the situation calls for some, there is a special force for the task. I recommend it.

I have been to Iceland; nobody in their right mind would want to take the place.

@Fridrik-

Жыл бұрын

Oy. We very much want you to want our country. Just don't actually come and take it.

@bababababababa6124

Жыл бұрын

@@Fridrik- too cold sorry

@MrWarimatras

Жыл бұрын

I have lived there and I would very much want to take that country for my own ! ... just kidding but not really

@idraote

Жыл бұрын

I would accept the crown of King and ruler of Iceland but I somehow doubt they would give it.

@Fridrik-

Жыл бұрын

@@idraote will you accept “Lord protector of Iceland” ? A title last held by Jorgen Jorgensen.

There's another exception which is not a Micronation, which is Costa Rica Which has more than 5 mln people and it's in a more turmoiled area than Iceland Same goes Panama, over 4 mln people and got invaded during Noriega's time in 1989 *OK LET'S IGNORE IT AND DUB THEM AS MICRONATIONS*

Most of the “countries who don’t have militaries” on your list are territories of other countries whose militaries they host and rely on, perhaps most notably the Falkland Islands considering there was a whole war about that. Also, Vatican City has a military despite being a micro nation. It’s just small and ceremonial.

@warbler1984

Жыл бұрын

Technically soes the Vatican not have a gendarmerie?

@DavidFraser007

Жыл бұрын

The Falklnd Islands had it's own little defence force in 1982

Iceland is far from the largest sovereign country without a military force. Costa Rica, Panama, and Mauritius all have higher populations. And Vanuatu only has about 70k fewer people. And I keep seeing comments about how they have some sort of militarily comparable force, but in this video Iceland's such forces are discussed too. It's a basic wikipedia search. I know because I remembered Costa Rica off the top of my head, searched up their "Public Forces," and was directed to the wikipedia article "List of countries without armed forces." And all five of the countries I mentioned are on the second list, which is titled "Countries with no standing army, but having limited military forces." As with most cases of eurocentrism I'm sure this was unintentional, but I don't see any other way to view this oversight. And as an aside, I'm subscribed to 4 of y'alls channels, and I love what y'all do. I'm commenting this out of love for y'all, not as a nitpicky "gotcha" shitpost.

I am from Iceland and this is all very right information, I even learned some new things

@karankapoor2701

Жыл бұрын

Hard to find an Icelandic person online these days

@Magni87

Жыл бұрын

@@karankapoor2701 We are everywhere

@dagasolros3110

Жыл бұрын

Im Icelander and its all true you have been saying

@prsimoibn2710

Жыл бұрын

So between the Bank and the US base, where's Iceland position from these intervenors ?

@alexfrance500

Жыл бұрын

From Iceland with a name about as Icelandic as mine ;D

I love that pissy patriotic Icelanders' most offensive pejorative was "children of the situation." Any other nation would have come up with something like "halfbreed bastards" but in Iceland ...nope

@arcticblue248

Ай бұрын

In Norway we called children between Norwegian mothers and German Dads .. for Tyskerbarn (German children direct translated), its a sad story tough as we (not me personally I was not born) punished innocent children for something they did not have anything to say about, and their mothers where called "Tyskertøs" that is roughly translated to German slut, and it was not uncommon to cut their hair among other things. Thor Heyerdal had a nickname "The hairdresser" as he cut alot of northerners womens hair, he had to be rescued by a couple of northerners and sent south before angry northerners would take out their revenge on him.

informational and interesting video.

This list is a bit weird. Costa Rica and Panama are far bigger than Iceland, and shouldn't Japan be included? (Yes I know in practice Japan has an army but that's true for most nations in that list)

when your army fits in a photo

30 dudes in normal clothes 😂😂😂 that cracked me up

We need a whole series on the COD wars please!

iceland did have a small army once it was based in the westmen islands and if you go to the swimingpool in heimaey you can read about it

"children of the situation". That is the most polite term to ever be used to describe such a situation

@ThorirPP

Жыл бұрын

While true, I don't think it was really trying to be polite towards the children. Rather, the whole issue about the occupation, and especially the idea of American soldiers hooking up with Icelandic women, was colloquially (both then and even today when talked about in history) referred as "ástandið", meaning "the situation". As such, children born from what was seen as a direct results of the occupation were talked about as "ástandabörn", i.e. "situation children/children of the situation". When "situation" = "the occupation by US soldiers", this term made very much sense

Reminds me of some funny picture I saw a while ago: "Greenland is north, east, south and west of Iceland"

I am bound to wonder about such an expression as "was binded"(2:00)!

Costa Rica's population is more than 10 times that of Iceland

7:34 that sounds like any old fun pub club to me haha

It really messes with my mind to hear the words ''Let's look at Iceland, the largest country in the world...'' - Also, great job with the google translate there on 3:35 x'D

Ah Iceland. Anyone remember when 10% of the entire population went to cheer on their team in the World Cup? Can't remember which year but fairly recently.

0:45 well i'd argue that alongside Iceland Costa Rica would also be a country of langer size without one^^

I had an old friend who served in Iceland during WWII

@paulcarpenter885

Жыл бұрын

During the "British invasion"? Very interesting if you've got anymore info

@geraldmeehan8942

Жыл бұрын

@@paulcarpenter885 No American occupation. His step son was close friend of my parents. He watched over us while I was doing community service at small local airport

When customers kick-off in branches of Iceland here in Britain, the manager can normally deal with it without calling in the military. Lol

Little corrections: neither Panama (pop 4 mln) nor Costa Rica (pop 5 mln) have armies. And in English there is no such word as "binded". Bound, please.

@Tugela60

Жыл бұрын

They do have armies, they just call them some variation of police forces. They don't have much in the way of heavy weapons but they are still armies.

@luisdestefano6056

Жыл бұрын

@@Tugela60 maybe, the point is debatable, but by that metric the pope’s Swiss Guards are an army, and the prince of Monaco has an army, and so does the prince of Liechtenstein.

That line roughly coincides with the Iron Curtain from the Cold War, so I'm not surprised. Mindsets take a long time to change.

As an icelandic person, I'd like to add that Denmark treated us very poorly during their reign. They would not allow us to do direct buisness with other countries, we couldnt make connections ourselves and they kept us in poverty by reselling our exports and controlling food imports. The reason the US had to basically build our entire infrastructure and roads for us in WW2 was because denmark would not fund even the most basic things we needed. We had nothing and when the US came over during ww2 it was basically like getting a beefy friend to stay over at our place so we had the safety to dump an abusive partner.

Weird fact in Iceland the old people used to refer to WW2 as the blessd war as in only then did we go from a bunch of farmers and fishermen to being able to make our own industries today, also that after an wary deadly eruption the Danes floated the idea to have the entire population moved of Iceland. Also that we kinda see ourselves as part of Scandinavia and we carry some adoration to our former overlords (mostly Denmark) so much that learning Danish is mandatory for children from age 10 to 16 and in Eurovision before the new voting system our judges would give Denmark the highest score regularly though I would like to know if these feelings of mutual heritage are seen as the same from the others prospective.

Interesting and to large extend correct. Three issues that were not highlighted. After the US Navy left Iceland - Isavia the governmental cooperation for airports and air navigation management rebuild the runways for dual civil and military purposes - this land-based air carrier is Icelands contribution to NATO defense. The Icelandic coastguard is not just responsible for the naval issues around Iceland but undertakes all technical issues regarding Icelandic defenses. ICRU is an ad hoc organization and the only time people were armed was in Afghanistan which led to not much happiness from other militaries as the ICRU staff is not military trained.

It’s an island populated by Vikings… elves and trolls… do NOT make them angry! Oh, and they have Björk too. :-)

@Oddingeaa

Жыл бұрын

Populated by Vikings is a misconception. Some Scandinavians did vikingraid from 800 to 1000 AD. Most of them stayed home.

what about Costa Rica ? its far larger population wise and yet it doesnt have military either ?

There's a couple of other details worth noting. First of all, Denmark signed a international Treaty making Iceland a nonmilitarized zone before Iceland gained independence, while never signed by Iceland they've continued to honour it. Another thing is. Iceland was technically part of Norway for most of the time Denmark ruled on Iceland, basically in Norway we had our own laws, administration, succession laws etc, we just happened to end up with the same kings as Denmark for many, many years, leading to us being a junior partner in the union. Iceland as a result had essentially been ruled by Norway for most of that period when Danish kings ruled. Eventually Norway *was* legally integrated, but it took a long time to fully implement that with shared administration, laws etc. When Norway was ceded to Sweden in 1814 Iceland really got integrated into Denmark. Although as you mentioned, some self rule was given back again some years later...

Fascinating

I’m against to violence or weapons but it’s always safe to have a civil guards an case of unexpected situations or catastrophic events. I will enjoy if is need.

"An Army, An Airline, and A Beer" - still my fav definition

My brother has been to Iceland and he says the country is beatiful, love our icelandic brothers🇮🇸🇳🇴

They have The Mountain.

I would like to say, there are still an US navy base stationed at reykjavik-keflavik airport..

You listed Vatican, and some other as well, as country without army but, technically, they have :)

@paulteusner

Жыл бұрын

But it’s not theirs. It’s Swiss

@markoprvulovic2693

Жыл бұрын

@@paulteusner No, they (serviceman) are Swiss by nationality but the Guard does not belong to Switzerland Armed Forces but Vatican City

@paulteusner

Жыл бұрын

@@markoprvulovic2693 Ah yeah that makes sense.

That list of "nations without militaries" is... weird. Many of them are colonies or special administrative regions of other countries. For instance, Puerto Rico does have a military: it's the US military. Same with the Falkland islands; if some country, say, Argentina, tried to invade the Falkland islands, then the British military would sail out to stop them, because the Falkland islands are part of the UK.

@loje248

Жыл бұрын

I agree. Same as French Polynesia and New Caledonia are part of France and, sadly, Honk Kong is part of China.

i often wonder if countries that appear to have little to no military defence, in fact do have one and they're pretending to be vulnerable.

Denmark and Norway have about 15 times Iceland's population and a sirmilar in culture and traditions and each has an army of around 25,000. Norwa has one and a half combat brigades (one real and enough other forces to make half a combat brigad in numbers). Iceland would then expect to field 1/10th of a brigade, or about a single company (about 200) of soldiers. Given those numbers that means only light infantry, no mech or arm. It simply makes most sence to deploy our resources in creating a coast guard worthy of a nation of millions rather than having an army, navy, air force and coast guard worthy of a nation of hundreds of thousands. Luxenbourg is probably the best comparison, it has a similar population but no need for a navy and has a fully mobilized army size of about one battallion.

When Njord is your Navy, and you're an island, do you really need armed forces?

Good video, but I was hoping to see someone about how foreign defence affects political decisions

03:44 Neutrality meant frigate all after 1939 04:41 frankly it is better than the alternative

0:50 Costa Rica has 5 million people that is more than 400,000

"binded?"?.... Bound!

"What makes a Country a Country?" My mind: 'Map Men did an episode about just that thing!' Heads off to watch Map Men episode...

If you guys like doing videos on History, you should make one about England's occupation of The Faroe Islands (Iceland's tiny south east cousin) and how horribly locals were treated by the occupying force

@erikthomsen4768

Жыл бұрын

No way. I am Faroese and I never heard anything like that.

@arnigeir1597

Жыл бұрын

I've never heard of that one either, and I'm next door...

@sleepyuser5189

Жыл бұрын

I've heard actually some good things about that but im not living there or anywhere close for that matter so idk

@xxxdumbwordstupidnumberxxx4844

Жыл бұрын

I'm not from the Faroe Islands, but I can't find much (and nothing negative) about the treatment of locals on the islands by Britain.

@someguy3766

Жыл бұрын

What? The locals were not treated "horribly" at all. It was a very peaceful affair (albeit still an armed occupation) and the British troops mingled with the locals quite well while giving the Faroese government full power to legislate (something Denmark had not done). This is largely why the islands had home rule after the war and still do today. 170 Faroese women married British troops and the Faroese government held a 50 year anniversary celebration of as they call it the "friendly occupation" in 1990. After the war British veterans placed a plaque in a cathedral on the islands thanking the Faroese for their kindness. The only Faroese people killed during the war were fishermen killed by German mines and bombs. While the Faroese were not thrilled by the occupation, they got along with the actual soldiers.

Waiting to see how TLDR explains how the qualify Iceland as the largest country without an army, not to mention all the irregularities in that list of countries...

0:57 I'm pretty sure Costa Rica doesn't have a military, but has way more than 400k people

Iceland: We have no army, but you are welcome to defend us, also build some roads while defending us

@JHNielson4851

Жыл бұрын

The "O" road!

aruba, cuaracao and sint maarten are part of the kingdom of the netherlands, wich has an army

When did Svalbard become its own country? Isn't it part of Norway?

At 1:04 "Iceland is by far the largest country with no army." The list you showed on screen listed Panama. You said Iceland had 400,000 people, Panama has 4.3 million and change.... Did your script writers make a mistake? I'll go back to watching the video now....

kinda ironic cuz when i set my vpn to iceland, i got a ton of icelandic military ads

Just a side note. The islands of Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten belong to the Dutch kingdom. There for the Netherlands is responsible for the defence of these island and there are navy and marine detachements presence on these islands.

LOL..its not so much who you know here in this instance but more about the physical,strategic location of this land mass it appears.

Not saying that I could do better however I don't know where to start with the inaccuracies of this video

protected by the "relative impressive" Danish military. the military that lasted... six hours in 1940.

While Iceland may be the largest country in land area without a standing army, Costa Rica doesn't have an army either, and it has over 5.1 million people living there compared to Iceland's 372,000.

1:52 *bound* not "binded." 5:17 *controversial* not "contraversial."

I like tldr .thank you

Costa Rica.also has no military, with a population about 10 times that of Iceland.

that list is confusing, even panama has 4,5 millions inhabitants.

Costa Rica has a population of 5.2 million. Panama is about 4.5 million. Iceland might be the largest country without a military by land mass, but definitely not by population.

The Cod Wars were in the 1970s, weren't they, not the 1950s.

as a non english native.. is "binded" actually correct?

@hetmankp

Жыл бұрын

It is not, but it does seem to demonstrate the poor state of the British education system.

Today, December 1st, Costa Rica celebrates 74 years without an army.

Iceland's strategy is to ask nicely so far it has seemed to work

@michaegi4717

Жыл бұрын

Yes, but honestly I don't understand why NATO isn't doing as befor WW2... just leave them alone and if we need iceland we just go there with our military. My oninion is that, they are rich if they don't contribute to NATO they have no right to be protected.

If you consider the numbers, with a population of only 400,000, Iceland would have to employ a sizable chunk of that population to man and suport that army. As an example of a relatively small European power that has few real threats, Sweden's army has (at it's lowest) consisted of 16,000 active service personnel. Something to bare in mind, an army is far more than a bunch of guys with guns. Behind that number you will have an array of civilian support and industry ranging from basic food and clothing through to specialised equipment, development, etc. Before long you could see 1/20th of the population being taken up just by the army. Then to make an army effective on a modern battlefield you need an air force and to get anywhere from an island nation a navy. With such a small population trying to finance all these things would most likely put them into an economic death spiral.

@elvarwinston

Жыл бұрын

Yeah army makes no sense but we do have capable swat teams with armored vehicles and guns

@hamosin5993

Жыл бұрын

That is a completely wrong understanding of economics and the military. It's wrong to assume that you will need a specific amount of personnel in your military based on some other military. The number of personnel in militaries around the world varies for various reasons with population size being certainly one of them and it does not correlate with their effectiveness in a conflict. "Behind that number you will have an array of civilian support and industry ranging from basic food and clothing through to specialized equipment, development, etc", yes but the ratio shouldn't be necessarily huge. "With such a small population trying to finance all these things would most likely put them into an economic death spiral", not really, there is no reason to assume that.

Vatikan State does have some sort of an army: The swiss guards. At least they were used as elite military forces in the past.

Costa Rica: what are we to you!?

i live in a small city of 230.000 people (not even capital of the small province, spain), iceland population is just two small cities. Honestly i dont see economic point for them to have a military.

@gfritlev9956

Жыл бұрын

Excactly or like one medium sized city (400.000)

'Just trust international ORGs bro. You don't need your own army bro.'

2% of their gdp would be basically nothing anyways. They have less people than some random city in Poland that you have never heard of.

Thank you.

But they apparently have a great hockey team………(D2)

Iceland does have a Navy or correctly an armed Coastguard

Cod wars, emu wars tell me all you want but both species had it coming.

what is the smallest country with a (substancial) military? Singapore?

@reijek990

Жыл бұрын

Singapore (5 million pop.) or Israel (9 million pop.). Singapore has advanced and modern army but they haven't really had a conflict that shows their actual effectiveness. Israel has a bit more population but we know that their armed forces are effective. Sweden (10 million pop.) also has a relatively strong armed forces and developed military industry for a country of their size and in Europe.

What about Costa Rica? A country of 5m people…. but with no army either