conventional forces in europe?
153874
What do you mean by this? Almost every European country has got army and conventional forces. If you mean US conventional forces in Europe- there are many troops in Germany and US government is signing contracts with other countries like Bulgaria and romania for joint training operations.
850676
Nato's Role before :\nprotection against the Warchau block.\nNato's role is quickly changing to a police force in UN missions.  \nAt this moment there are Belgian, British, Canadian, Dutch, French, German, Luxembourg, Tjech, US troops in Afghanistan under Nato command (I think also Spanish and Polish but I'm not certain of these).\nYes, Nato is certainly needed.
1001956
The Marine Corps was not active in the European theater during WWII.  It's entire concentration was against the Japanese in the Pacific.  Nowhere in the archives will you find Marine units having been deployed on Eisenhower's side of the war.  The one exception may have been UDT teams, however, I don't believe the Marines were active in those units during WWII.
718380
The quick answer is that a 'Conventional War' involves a formal declaration of war, two sides of military forces, wearing uniforms and going at each other from two sides of an imaginery 'front'. This would describe much of WWI and WWII.\n\nVietnam was different in that the Viet Cong was not confined to uniformed soldiers fighting the usual battles, but involved guerilla tactics carried out by just about anyone. In Vietnam it was almost impossible to tell who the enemy were. Sometimes they were women and children wearing ordinary clothing.\n\nThe other aspect was that much of the actual fighting took place in the jungle. This necessitated the use of napalm in a desperate attempt to clear the vegetation. The Viet Cong were notorious for laying deadly traps that could skewer a man or decapitate him instantly.\n\nIn a way, Vietnam was not only unconventional, but it was actually pretty unfair for the American troops.
769760
Sorry Holly, Liberalism is a failed ideology.  It has been tried in Europe for the past 50 years and has failed.  Most Western European counties are economically stagnant, except for the ones that are in the process of or have reversed their socialized systems.\n\nTheir economies have only stayed stable as long as they have because they have NOT had to spend a dime on defense for the last 50 years.  The US has protected them.  If the US dissolved NATO, and Europe actually had to defend itself.  Every European county would go into a deep recession.
264210
try eures:\n\nhttp://europa.eu.int/eures/
533283
All of Europe is very close to becoming a totalitarian islamic state.  Britain is on this path but nowhere near as close as France, Germany, Belgium etc.  Europe is too busy worrying about the genocide that they are about to become victims of, to laugh at anybody, particularly, relatively safe, Britain.
832926
A Brit wouldn't..(not a true one)..they would join the British Armed Forces...
688828
Large standing army with good training systems learned from the West. Russian equipped now so the usual AK47's AK 74, shoulder launched rockets etc.\n\nSpecial forces are numerous and built along SAS / Delta principles but not as disciplined.\n \nSubstantial airforce with modern fighter planes, including Iraqs airforce which went to Iran in the first Gulf War to stop the US detroying it and then they never gave it back. Mostly Russian aircraft including Mig 29 interceptors. Some French aircraft. \n\nSmall navy but modern missile patrol boats and Frigates courtesy of the French again. Excocet missiles from the French.\n\nLots and lots of medium range missile systems similar to and including Scud.\n\nLots of poison gas and chemical weapons, which they happily used on the Iraquis.  \n\nFrom an experience perspective they fought an 8 year war against Iraq 20 years ago which was extremely bloody and costly. Interestingly neither side won any territory and it was a stalemate even after 8 years of very nasty fighting so you could assume that they are similar in fighting capability to the Iraquis.
162039
Shaping your military strategy for peace would be an oxymoron.  I think you're trying to ask if various military forces are developing weapons and tactics for missions beside that of conventional warfare.  The answer to that would be yes.  Preparing to fight unconventional warfare is the reality nowadays, and the US armed forces are definitely reshaping their structure, equipment, training, and tactics to do so.
332257
Oh, it would be best if we could all turn our military forces (and police forces as well) into just crisis relief forces. That would be beautiful.\nBut it won't work. Not in the real world: it is not perfect.\n\nWhat you're talking about is something like all-covering police / border guard force. I know of no serious country that would have done so. \nGermany does have regular army (and a good one, if I can judge), just because of historical events their constitution prohibits them from fileding this army outside of Germany.\nFrance doesn't like to send it's own soldiers away, but from what I know thay can be pretty tough as well. And if France needs its business in any part of the world to be backed with bayonets, they send the Foreign Legion. And besides, they prefer to stress they won't go after the US - I belive it's their national pride.\n\nA lot of countries can't afford to field any significant expeditionary force, but they keep their own armies as strong as they see fit (& can afford).\n\nWhile I too dislike the way the US messes with global politics, I can't deny the fact they do have military power to back their ideas. And, although they tend to be fineese like a hammer blow, they are _sometimes_ right.\n\nPS. But they do not have a monopoly on truth & rightfullness. And I'm going to celebrate the day when they take this into their hearts...
1140373
I've never heard that question posed so succinctly and eloquently before, but yes, that's exactly right.  Europeans knew we would defend them against attack, so they were free to act irresponsibly.  They didn't have to be realistic.\n\nThis article is only peripherally related to your question, but you'll love it:  \n\nhttp://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,343378,00.html
58749
Conformite Europeenne
500599
China has by far the most numerous forces, and as proven in Korea they make up for lack of technology by rigid discipline and force of numbers. Most of their technology however is licenced Russian technology and the reality of that is that with the exception of the AK 47 is isnt really very spectacular.\n\nRussia still maintains large forces but particulalry since the collapse of the USSR it is badly paid, badly equipped and therefore badly motivated. It is unlikley that they could sustain significant  military action either economically or politcally now.\n\nIndia has a massive army also, and has good training and due to its row with Pakistan keeps itself ready for war. The Indian professional soldier (as part of the British Army) has always fought with courage and distinction (with the exception of a few incidents of changing sides against the Japanese due to the activities of the Indian Nationalist Movement). Equipment wise however they exist of second and third hand Russian and Chinese stuff as they spend most of their defence budget on Nukes which they point at Pakistan.\n\nFrance maintains the largest armed forces in Europe and has based its defence policy since World War two on having an independent capability from NATO of which it is not a member. Its well equipped and has good technology (France was the only western nation to supply military equipment to Iraq, despite the rhetoric from people). Its military is also positioned around the globe as France remains a colonial power.\n\nLasly my very own United Kingdom (England is one of four countries which make up the UK). We have a tiny military force compared the the others you mention. Our airforce has less planes in total than the specialist support aircraft in the US Marine Corps alone. Our entire army would fit into a soccer stadium, and the last time we had to mount a martime invasion of anywhere we had to "borrow" the QE2 cruise liner, several car ferries, and container ships because our Navy hasnt got enough ships.\n\nOur SA80 rifles are made of plastic and fall apart in the sand (although the new ones are better), we sent troops to Iraq sharing one set of body armour between two as there were not enough, and our battlefield radios don't work.  \n\nOur Eurofighter is brilliant but five years and a billion dollars behind schedule, and the Harrier jump jet is still amazing but being phased out due to cost.\n\nDespite all of that on the positive side the British armed forces are absolutely first class at what they do and have proven themselves in battle against superior odds again and again. Falklands, Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq, Oman, Malaya, Borneo, Afghanistan etc, and from a special forces perspective the SAS and SBS are something to be proud of.\n\nThe British armed forces, hawe been designed to perform a key role alongside the U.S and our European allies as part of NATO, and to be a fast reaction force for crisis around the world. They are no longer scaled to have a one on one war with anyone.
553587
British Special Air Service. A special forces unit formed in the Libyan desert during world war two, made up of highly trained four man squads who worked behing enemy lines blowing up airfields, troop convoys, etc etc.\n\nCalled the Special Air Service Brigade to fool the germans into thinking it was a much larger force.\n\nFought in the Malayan and  Borneo campaigns in the 50's and 60's and became expert at Jungle fighting and defeated both the communist guerrilas and Indonesian insurgents.\n\nFought in the desert campaigns in Oman in the 70's with distinction, and also developed a counter terrorist role in Northern Ireland.\n\nFamously stormed the Iranian Embassy in London live on T.V after terrorists occupied the building and held the Iranaian diplomats hostage. All the terrorists were killed except one.\n\nWas the model for the U.S Delta force after a U.S Green Beret officer was seconded. Delta and SAS still swap officers on secondment.\n\nSaw distinguished service in action in the Falklands, Sierra Leone, both gulf wars, South America (anti drugs ops) and has trained special forces units around the world.\n\nMade up of four "squadrons" A, B, D, and G and recruits across the British and commonwealth armies, mainly from the parachute regiment except G squadron which recruits exclsively from the Guards.\n\nThe Royal Marine equivalent is the SBS Special Boat Squadron and is similar to the SEALS.\n \nIs now the most highly specialised special forces unit in the world.
393408
There was no coalition.  Britain sent the most troops.  Poland a few, Spain a few, Italy a few.  Spain withdrew first after the train bombings in Madrid.  Poland is out.  Italy too. Only Britain is left and they are pulling out. \nThe whole thing was a scam
817131
The Uk has many 'special relations' with many countries and corps.\n\nMost of the corps are british multinational corps like BA, Areospcae (or what ever its called)\n\nThey countries we most get on with (other than the US) are European, like France and Germany, where they are so big and can effect the EU so much we have no choice but to have good relations with them.\n\nOther than that, we just keep people sweet, just incase we need anything.