The UN's "Green Helmets". Climate Change as a Pretext for Military Intervention?

To say things can't get any crazier is an understatement....as if the UN is looking for more excuses/pretexts to justify invading/occupying sovereign nations.

I know there have been threads made in the past about China Invading the USA, about UN troops being stationed on US soil, about Chinese Troops covertly stocking up preparing for an invasion of the US mainland, about what would cause/justify the UN to get in on America's internal affairs?

Many think it might be due to social internal strife/civil unrest.....but this idea by the UN seems to trump them all.

Climate Change as a Pretext for Military Intervention?

The UN Security Council is “examining whether a green helmet force should intervene in conflicts caused by rising seas levels and shrinking resources” [1] and climate change in general. This, coupled with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon’s statement that the goal of his second term was to encourage “global development that reduces poverty but preserves the environment for future generations,” [2] raises the question of what would occur if the UN did in fact establish a climate change peacekeeping force and if the UN is overstepping its boundaries.

Overstepping it's boundaries? What boundaries? They seem to do or not do as they want, not as they need!

But the quote from that linked article that would be of interest to Amercian's on this forum is -

There is also debate over whether the UN is overstepping its boundaries. For example, some speculate the UN troops could end up on US soil, stating the that UN intervening in climate change

would give [them] justification to place a "peacekeeping" force on U.S. soil, of course. Virtually the entire U.S. Southeast -- from Texas all the way to D.C. -- is currently sweltering under a severe heat wave combined with a hundred-year drought in many areas. Under the UN's new "climate change peacekeeping" initiatives, if crop failures result in riots, they could drop in a few hundred thousand UN troops -- all wearing GREEN helmets -- and then explain they're here to save us from "conflicts caused by shrinking resources. [7]

What a perfect scenario for UN Intervention in US Affairs! Dont engineer civil strife, engineer a climatic event....like what we currently have with the Missisippi Flooding maybe?

However, others argue that it won’t do much harm as “UN blue-helmeted peacekeepers are pretty much helpless wherever they are deployed so you might ask will changing the color of their helmets alter that reality?”

Helpless? Possibly, but it does not change the fact that it could be the justification to get international troops on the ground.

Heres my little theory......which country could provide at short notice the necessary Manpower for this Green Helmeted UN Brigade necessary to assist the US in time of need?

China?

A legal method for Chinese troops to put boots on the ground under the guise of a UN Green-corp environmental intervention.

Does anyone else out there see a Socialist/Green movement trying to take over global politics in the last few years? Is this the true face of the New World "Communist" Order?

US is under threat of being over-run by watermelons.....Green on the outside and Red on the inside.

You;ve been warned!

Ugh, horrible reporting from the source you linked. After going through their sources, you can break down what was really being talked about before they cherry picked it.

It is estimated that as many as 200 million people will be displaced by natural disasters and climate change around the world by 2050, said the report by Washington, D.C.-based Refugees International. The world's poorest and most crisis-prone countries will be disproportionately affected.

1


As far as China goes:

China, for example, argues that the security council should leave climate change to the experts.

1

and...

But China and other countries resisted, arguing the security council should stick to maintaining the peace.

The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 after World War II to replace the League of Nations, to stop wars between countries, and to provide a platform for dialogue. It contains multiple subsidiary organizations to carry out its missions.

en.wikipedia.org...

like the League of Nations the United Nations needs to be removed from being a blight on mankind.

the League of Nations wasn't able to do as advertised, ie stopping war. so they gave the United Nations a little more teeth with member countries supplying the troops, arms and equipment. as a "peace keeper" the UN has likewise not been able to stop wars, troops having their collective hands tied were ALLOWED to do NOTHING as people were massacred around them. the troops ONLY being ALLOWED to protect THEMSELVES but not innocent civilians. factions on both sides of a conflict pretty much just IGNORED the idiots in their pretty blue hats. their record of stopping conflict once started is pretty dismal.

their record for stopping conflicts BEFORE they started is also quite dismal. even MEMBER countries would just ignore them when told NOT to go to war. once AT WAR the UN didn't even ATTEMPT to stop them. just a lot of arguing was achieved.

i have to assume that by giving the new GREEN FORCE a different coloured hat that likewise their rules of engagement would LIKELY also be changed. this really doesn't make sense not allowed to stop a conflict but alowed to invade over being "green" or not that is ridiculous. first off "HUMAN CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING" is a farce. we don't even have NEAR enough HISTORICAL records of temperature to even BEGIN to make a case for it. this is just further PROOF that the UN has turned into a FASCIST organization bent on making everybody toady up to them.

the mandate of human rights hasn't been so successful either has it? again they just get ignored. Canada was once apparently told that to fund Catholic schools and not ANY OTHER religious school system was against HUMAN RIGHTS and to cease funding them or fund everyone. once again they were just blatantly ignored. Ontario still has public supported public and CATHOLIC school systems, while REFUSING to even consider funding any other religious schools like christian, Muslim or anyone else for that matter. we hear of human rights violations from across the world and NOTHING EVER gets done to stop it. just a bunch of useless Whining about it. that works so well doesn't it?

international law? give me a break. the idea of one world law is a joke. it is up to COUNTRIES to form laws. isn't human rights and not going to war against this supposed law? well they have been rather successful at enforcing it haven't they?

economic development, and social progress, two more FAILED MANDATES. the only economic development that has occurred is corporations taking advantage of low pay rates abroad. while it may help a country in the short term all it does is make SLAVE NATIONS. the peoples lives are not improved at all really. they may get a few trinkets but nothing substantial. we haven't seen poorer nations able to rise up and take their place as equals.

you will note that there is NO UN MANDATE about forcing so called GREEN measures on everyone. NO MANDATE for keeping the earth clean. any mandates to that effect they have invented themselves. as such THEY ARE massively OVERSTEPPING their bounds. before inventing new jobs don't you think they should FIRST get a handle on the jobs they were INVENTED FOR?

the worst is that as an organization whose PRIMARY FUNCTION is to propagate PEACE. wants to GO TO WAR to stop people who THEY DEEM as harming the environment.

a better name for the so called "green helmets". would be UNATCO, it seems to fit the modern UN and their proposed anti green armed forces pretty well. for those unfamiliar with the name it comes from a video game, DEUS EX. it stands for United Nations Anti-Terrorist Coalition. sadly if you look at this web page en.wikipedia.org... a Wikipedia listing of organizations in the game with a lot of fictitious events. sadly some of these events ring bells such as the UN banning guns, and a "false flag terrorist attack". in this case taking out the statue of liberty. makes you wonder doesn't it?