United Nations International Rapid Reaction Force

Toronto Star: United Nations 'army' proposed
International rapid reaction force could be deployed within 48 hours of a UN green light
Jun. 15, 2006. 09:03 AM
OLIVIA WARD
FEATURE WRITER
When emergencies strike, Canadians dial 911.
[...]
This week, a group of academics, former officials and security experts are tabling a proposal they hope will change that by creating an international rapid reaction force that could be deployed within 48 hours of a green light from the United Nations.

[edited to use ex tags -nygdan]

[edit on 18-6-2006 by Nygdan]

[edit on 18-6-2006 by Nygdan]

This is an interesting concept. I can understand the concerns of both Western and Developing nations but if it were used correctly it could save lives. Certainly it is worth serious consideration. Who and how would determine it's use is a question that needs to answered however before it is put into practice. I look forward to a lively debate on this.

i won't be surprised if this is the "humble" beginning of the One-World Army..

Originally posted by Elex
i won't be surprised if this is the "humble" beginning of the One-World Army..

I'm not trying to start a big flaming match but why do you believe that? I'm curious and would like more information from all angles.

Well it's always been a NWO aim to establish an international army, ain't it? What better cover than the UN...

I'm not one for New World Order paranoia, whoever, some questions do come to mind. Who is on that panel that recommended this organization, I wonder? If this is part of a NWO plot, then those people, or at least some of them, are in one way or another NWO actors.

It lists some people as supportive of it and having written books that make similar recommendations, such as
Peter Langille of University of Western Ontario
Robert Johansen, a political scientist at the University of Notre Dame

They noted:

With countries moving away from UN peacekeeping, and troops overstretched in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, (the rapid reaction force) has new appeal."

So on the one hand, its tied in with as a 'consequence' of the war on terror. Though, oddly, also with people moving away from UN authority.


The odd thing about the article is, it doesn't say what "group of academics, former officials and security experts" have actually proposed it.

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Nygdan]

Though reaction time is important I think the UN should focus more on creating a effective force first. The UN has been put to shame by a few hundred mercs that did jobs thousands of UN soldiers couldnt handle in the past.

If your force is not effective whats the point of getting is anywhere in 48 hours.

[edit on 18-6-2006 by ShadowXIX]

I emailed the author of the article, and they said that it wasn't a committee or anything like that, RATHER, the book mentioned in the article, thats where the idea comes up, and some of the contributors to the book, they are going to present the book to the UN (by this time that should've already occured).

So, lets be clear, its not the UN that is proposing this.

This rapid reaction force would be the same as this one, I guess:

Europe Creates Rapid Reaction Force

posted on 2005/5/24 at 00:23 by Hellmutt


The European Union has formed two new battle groups for peacekeeping operations. Four battle groups excisted already and they plan to have a total of a dozen battle groups. The battle groups should be able to be deployed "anywhere in the world" within 10 days if they need to respond to a situation.

I don't think its the same group. Iinfact, since the UN one is just a suggestion of some academics, 'it' isn't anything. Many nations now are following the US pattern of having rapid reaction forces, this is what the STYKER vehicle is being used for.