Can Britain occupy Europe, Africa, North America, South America, Australia and Oceania without the United States, France and Germany?

Judging from the final result, Britain certainly can't completely occupy these places. This is determined by the geographical conditions in Britain. Except Europe, all other places were occupied by Britain, but in the end, all these countries declared their independence. Even the United States was originally a British colony. Most of the first generation immigrants were British, but the United States eventually became the United States of America. First of all, the first generation of immigrants themselves are mostly British underclass, and many of them are criminals. It is difficult for them to identify with senior British officials in power. Even if they agree that they are British, with the passage of time, Britain is too far away for future immigrants. This land is their home, but colonial officials are mobile officials appointed by the Queen. The contradiction between the two is irreconcilable and will inevitably break out. This truth is the same for people in other colonies. As for Europe, that is even more impossible. You know, Britain didn't set up an empire from the beginning. The Renaissance did not originate in Britain. The foundation of Britain's rise was only the first-Mover advantage of the first industrial revolution, and other countries never stopped catching up. On the combat effectiveness of the army, the infantry of other European powers never lost to Britain at any time. And such countries are not one or two, but more than n! As an island country, Britain can't unify Europe in any case.