• Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      NORAD already has shared skies provisions. US jets can fly into our airspace as needed to intercept foreign attackers. We can do the same with them.

      None of this constitutes a threat, despite Hoekstra’s weird, fumbling attempt to deliver it like one.

      He basically said “If you don’t give us your business, we’ll have no choice but to protect your airspace even harder!” Oh, wow, scary. No, please, don’t do that.

    • sik0fewl@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not even close.

      They’re suggesting that Canada won’t be able to defend its own airspace so US will have to be able to operate more freely in Canadian than they already do. They are saying that the NORAD agreement would need to be updated to accommodate this.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          And neither Finland nor Sweden are at war with Russia. Bullshit scare tactic used by fucking putin yes, but it’s not itself an act of war. At least, it isn’t generally treated as such.

          • UnspecificGravity@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 days ago

            You seem to be applying a pretty strict definition to what is actually an arbitrary term. An act of war can be anything that any nation wants to call an act of war.

            So I guess we should probably just use some of the countries involved in the real life case we are talking about.

            Does anyone consider violation of airspace by a nations warplanes to be in-and-of-itself an act of war or at least a proactive action worthy of escalation and retaliation? Oh yeah, the United States does. And so does Russia.

            • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              I’m not applying a strict standard, I’m using the two examples you gave to illustrate my point that it’s much more complex than they thought. Finland and Sweden aren’t at war so no, at least in those two cases its not a declaration of war.

              • UnspecificGravity@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Just kinda decided to pretend we were talking about “declarations of war” now? I can see you are either not interested in having a grown up discussion or you’re genuinely unable to have one.

                • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  That’s the whole subject being discussed. Here’s the OP comment we’re all replying to:

                  Where they ask if this is a declaration of war. Not sure how that’s pretending anything.

          • Greddan@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Just because our politicians won’t accept it. We are currently at war with Russia. Have been for years. At least that’s what the Russians tell their own population. Then we have the constant sabotages in and around our territory by “totally not Russian military” people. When was the last time anyone formally “declared” a war? It isn’t the 1800s anymore.