This is a great series of articles in Vice.
First, how to invade and conquer Scotland. This is really just a sensible conversation about the future security policy of an independent Scotland. As for the possibility of an invasion: "I don't think they're going to take our wind turbines."
Next, Russia. This would be tricky: "you need to embrace the notion of a total annihilation of your country". Fair enough.
Then America. Again, very tricky: "The amphibious assault capability of the world's militaries, excluding the United States, is simply too small... any attempted invasion of the US would first look like a rather motley caravan of vulnerable civilian ships and aircraft." Can't see that working too well.
But best of all is the contrast between a Brit talking about Britain and a Frenchman talking about France. Roughly equivalent invasion challenges, one might think, but such different reactions to the question. So, on nuclear weapons, from the Brit: "In order to completely remove the British deterrent you'd need to therefore find and destroy the SSBN currently on patrol, meaning you have a better anti-submarine capability than Cold War Russia, and simultaneously carry out the most audacious surprise attack since Pearl Harbour." From the Frenchman: "Nobody can attack France. ...We could kill 65 million Americans. We could destroy all major US cities on the east coast." Ca, c'est l'esprit!
I loved the Frenchman's analysis of world affairs too:
"Combat conditions have completely changed – only, the folly of men has not, and this is why we need to have a strong army. We must not let down our guard, otherwise we'll find ourselves obliged to follow our "protectors”.
Are these "protectors" the Americans?
Yes. They manipulate European countries, but not France. They impose their foreign policy throughout Europe – except on us, because we are autonomous in nuclear power.
But don't you think the States could get past all our deterrents?
Not militarily, because we have the same means of destruction. The United States are dissatisfied with our military strike force – they are our allies, not our friends – because we don't follow them like dogs, like the United Kingdom do. They bribe a number of movements, including Greenpeace, to discredit the nuclear forces. The Americans would love to be the only Westerners with nuclear power."
Finally, how about this vignette:
"A decade ago, Americans disrupted our satellites after we refused to go to Iraq. We didn't follow them in the battle because we knew that it was a shitty call and that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. The Americans also knew it, but they wanted to go there to satisfy their geopolitical goals.
We fought Uncle Sam in space?
In the name of peace, we had to make them understand that we could disrupt their satellites, too. And as you can imagine, it happened several times."