Seven NATO allies to create new rapid reaction force of at least 10,000 soldiers

Seven NATO allies plan to create a new rapid reaction force of at least 10,000 soldiers as part of plans to boost NATO defences in response to Russia's intervention in Ukraine

The force will be one of the boldest steps taken by any group of Nato members in response to the crisis. The aim is to create a fully functioning, division-sized force for rapid deployment and regular, frequent exercises. Officials involved in the planning say it will have the capacity to increase significantly in size.

Countries involved include Denmark, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Norway and the Netherlands. Canada has also expressed an interest in taking part, it said.

www.reuters.com...
www.ft.com...


Finally. Considering the whole situation in Ukraine, I have waited for something like that to happen for ages. As I am living in Baltics, the aggression in Ukraine has created some fear in this area as well. Who knows, how the Ukrainian situation culminates and if Russia wanted to expand more, Baltics are more than likely to be next. In my eyes, creating such force is very necessary and finally it got done.

a reply to: Cabin

I already thought there was a NATO RRF and an EU rapid reaction Brigade, is this another one, an amalgamation of both or reorganisation of one?

a reply to: Cabin

I am all for like minded nations getting together to form a defense against aggression.. Let us hope it will not be a political feather bed for expensive toys that will be ineffective in todays modern theater of war or a tool of some modern day dictator.. In todays world many are coming to realize it is better to be armed and not need the arms than to be unarmed and wish you had something more than a thrown rock for defense..

The whole scaremongering thing about Russia wanting to expand and gobble up Eastern European states is nothing more than Cold War era BS, reconstituted for the latest round of Russia Bashing. The thing is, there is absolutely zero evidence of any of this, except in the minds of the deranged people pushing it. Yes, our own dear leaders and their banking and corporate handlers, as they did too to get the last 2 world wars started.

This latest idea and a NATO force, including maritime and air assets is a dangerous escalation and provocation. I also see the US is replacing all the tanks and other hardware they have had stored in Norway (going back to the cold war again) in readiness for another conflict.

This whole thing is being escalated on lies and deceit with zero evidence to back any of it up. But hey, at least the eugenics crowd will get their wish for a depopulated world, and fewer people are easier to control for the turds when they venture back out of their cosy bunkers!

a reply to: Cabin

A seven nation army... The covert war, that in my eyes putin clearly is responsible for, will soon be an open one. Think about the rebel guy admitting they have russian soldiers in their rows and they get weapons and training from them.

I have no source because I saw this yesterday evening somewhere but I´m sure I´m not the only one who saw this

a reply to: Cabin

What do you think exactly will happen?

Do you think 70,000 soldiers means something? You realize we live in a modern era, where an entire city could be wiped out in less than 20 seconds? Do you think that if Russia, or any other country would made an aggression move, those 70,000 soldiers would mean a thing? What you see happening in Ukraine is a child's play comparing to what might happen if this whole thing escalates even more. I mean, Denmark, Latvia, Estonia such military forces...

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Cabin

I already thought there was a NATO RRF and an EU rapid reaction Brigade, is this another one, an amalgamation of both or reorganisation of one?

Yes, this would be a new one. The other NATO RRF is US, UK, Germany, France and Belgium. Both though are not entirely NATO as you can see.

One of the big problems with these RRF's though is communication. If I remember correctly, everyone in the older RRF had to speak English to try to ease that.

Been saying for 10 years that a A team of allied top men (need to include France, UK and US) is what is needed to address problems whereever with inhuman savaging vermin in the interest of humanity!! Now go make ISIS maggots pay the piper!!!!
The men that are coming for you are not afraid of your beheading. Their hands are not tied behind their backs!!!!
So long ISIS maggots!!!!!!

a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

You are way to much emotionally connected to this, it seems. Who gives the right to those A teams and who decides how to use them? It´s the same mentality people are bitching/hating about world-police-USA.

sure, the weak should be protected by the strong but we all saw what happened the last times.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Cabin

Think about the rebel guy admitting they have russian soldiers in their rows and they get weapons and training from them.

"We have never hid from anyone that there are many Russians amongst us. without heir help we would have struggled and it would have been more difficult to fight. There were between three and four thousand of them in our ranks. Many of them have already gone home. But many more remain here. Unfortunately, some of them have died. Among volunteers from Russia there have always been many retired military servicemen. They fight alongside us understanding that this is their duty. Moreover, I will be even more frank with you, there are serving soldiers among us who prefer their vacations not on sea beaches but among us, among brothers fighting for our freedom."

Searching through some of the media outlets, western media seems to only report this part of the quote: "there are serving soldiers among us who prefer their vacations not on sea beaches but among us, among brothers fighting for our freedom" while Eastern media seems to leave that part out.

It is semantics and word games, typical politics. All the Russians there are there on their own behalf, not Russia's - presumably. If our soldiers decided to fight for Ukraine, retired or on leave, and Russia found out would we want them to beat the war drums? Of course any active duty U.S. soldier would be severely punished, but separated soldiers would be free to do so.

There is still no hard proof of Russians or their equipment being in Ukraine under an official capacity though, and quite frankly, it would be hard to prove that short of actual video with time and location on the video itself (unsanitized UAV) showing them crossing and coming in as Ukraine has the same equipment. Now, there probably are Russians there under official covert capacity, as there was in Crimea that Putin later admitted to; however, I ask anyone, if so they are, would they not be doing the same type of things the U.S. does itself? Providing funds and arms and support to rebel factions that we "support" and are in opposition to a regime we "do not support" and sometimes providing actual U.S. fighting capacity (Libya)? The only difference, this is on Russia's border and nothing has been on ours.

The pot is calling the kettle black plain and simple.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Thank you for clearing this up for me
But another thought, the one I initially had was what if let´s say they send them on "vacation" on purpose.
Just a thought. Don´t know if there is any trickery in military law that makes this possible.
something like

"as a soldier for your country you have the duty to give support to your fellow landsman, regardless of vacation and location"

something along those lines. Not saying it´s like that of course but it´s a thought.

a reply to: verschickter

I do not know how leave works in the Russian military; however, as long as your are serving in the U.S. military (and the same is for Western militaries in general) you are representing that nation in an official capacity, on or off duty. That said, if you fought while on leave, you would be giving the perception your country is sanctioning the act, hence why one would be severely punished, and quite frankly, a retired person shamed.

Is it a "trick" the Russians would use, yes, probably. Again, is it really any different than anything we (the U.S./U.K., West) does, no.

If they were to be deployed, my guess is that it would be in a humanitarian fashion, look at the countries involved. In the scheme of things 10,000 troops isn't really a huge +/- either way to either side. I would tend to believe that there is a reason the US are trying to develop a hyper-sonic weapon; so that their nukes hit first. Russia and the US comprise 94% of the entirety of developed nuclear weapons, with Russia having 1600 operational warheads. Mutually assured destruction is very much a thing with 9 countries having nuclear weapons. Oh, and ISIS are more than likely able to develop a radiological dirty bomb, that at this point could be driven across the southern US border. ISIS

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Is it a "trick" the Russians would use, yes, probably. Again, is it really any different than anything we (the U.S./U.K., West) does, no.

You´re right but if so, it would mean putin is fighting a war, covered.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Is it a "trick" the Russians would use, yes, probably. Again, is it really any different than anything we (the U.S./U.K., West) does, no.

You´re right but if so, it would mean putin is fighting a war, covered.

Pot calling the kettle black... America’s Secret War in 134 Countries (article is pretty well sourced). I am not saying this is right by any means, what I am saying is my government, the U.S. likes to say a lot of things people and countries cannot do while it's doing those very things themselves.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

You are not understanding. I know that the USA is not better but that´s not the point in this thread, or is it?

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

You are not understanding. I know that the USA is not better but that´s not the point in this thread, or is it?

No, it is not. Thank you for bringing that back. Sorry for derailing the thread for a minute Cabin.

As far as the OP, I think we will have to wait a week or so to hear the official mission. As noted in the thread already, I would not doubt it would be humanitarian and a "in case of worst scenario backup" type of deal. Sending in an actual military capacity would surely escalate the situation to a hot war between Russia and the West, something I hope they are not willing to do without providing the public with a bunch of evidence (though we get duped time and time again, Iraq twice by "satellite imagery" and "first hand testimony"). Also, Kicked noted it's only 10,000 troops, you would see more than that as well as equipment due to an expected reaction from Russia. Only time will tell though.

a reply to: Nikola014

a Rapid reaction force is not meant to win a war, its meant to buy time...

a RRF that contains soldiers from 7 different nations means, its political as well as military in its power projection.

Oh and No nation is going to use Nukes, at this stage in the game so yes a RRF is vitally important in my opinion.

It should be a Global force of 1,000,000 Troops.

Humnitarians needs and concerns are now via Social and other Medias in peoples faces and heart in todays world.People WANT to see a Global Humanitarian Police Force which would allow them to collectively support the STOPPING of Non-Humanitarian actions ANYWHERE on the Planet on short notice without catalysing major or Global International problems of conflicts.

The Rule is NO WOMEN AND NO CHILDREN,and Humanity needs a HAMMER to make this happen it isnt a perfect World yet,but we are seemingly moving in the right direction with focuses which enable us to stop Non-Humanitarian behaviours.

I personally want to see a world where if you put a video of the murder of women and children online you KNOW there are good men and women ALREADY COMING FOR YOU .....ACROSS ALL GLOBAL BORDERS....with relentless and permanent intentions.

I want to see a world where when I see a Cop shoot or abuse someone online,I KNOW SOMEONE IS GOING TO BUST THEM FOR IT AND WILL MAKE IT STICK.

I think we are on the right track, a lot of work to do in our own backyards concurrently,but we are on the right track.


10,000 people are the support staff of an effective Force, we need to be able to drop 100,000 Troops on you within 48 hours anywhere on the Planet.With todays technologys we can get the people there if the resources and bodies are made available.

The next time 30,000 people are chased into the mountains and are being starved and killed by de-hydration and murdered systematiclly before our very eyes,the People or GLOBAL HUMANITY will be able to respond with a HAMMER,and not just rescue people but also capture and hold accountable the perpatrators.

a reply to: Irishhaf

Similar to the Irish soldiers in the UN in Syria currently trying to 'buy time' for the Fijian and other UN soldiers captured or surrounded on the border between Syria and Lebanon

PDUK