Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

english.aawsat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#31

Post by Synaesthesia »

algo_trader wrote: post #27
inaros wrote: post #7

Is it ok now to call the US electorate suckers? "US Republicans consider health care cuts to fund Iran war" - https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/us-republicans-consider-he... A reminder Israel has both universal healthcare and tuition free university...and voted yesterday to give $255 million to ultra-Orthodox programs and institutions, including yeshivas...that actually refuse to engage in military conscription... ht…

> Israel has both universal healthcare and tuition free university This is both wrong and off topic. Israel health care is funded by a 5% additional income tax tier. non working people pay a significant fixed annual fee. University is not free. $5K for the public institutions - which have limited admissions. $10K for many of the spill over private institutions. Now - about those space lasers ....

5k is almost free. And yes you pay tax to find universities. Makes sense. Paying full tuition in the USA is like paying a tax, only worse, it's a lot more.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#32

Post by Synaesthesia »

yesco wrote: post #28
ceejayoz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty sure those agreements don't say "And you can tell us what to do with our defense assets whenever you want". Of course they do. https://es.usembassy.gov/agreement-on-defense-cooperation/ "To this end, Spain grants to the United States of America the use of operational and support installations and grants authorizations for use of Spanish territory, territorial sea and airspace for purposes within the bilatera…

I want to say upfront that I'm absolutely not trying to say Spain should or even needs to join this silly war. But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Iran is in fact a threat relevant to NATO considering most of it is/was within ballistic missile range. It's also a simple fact that Iran's manufacturing base has been suppor…

Iran was never a threat to NATO. It was posing no threat when the US launched this war. The entire threat is the fault of US aggression.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#33

Post by etiennebausson »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #31
algo_trader wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Israel has both universal healthcare and tuition free university This is both wrong and off topic. Israel health care is funded by a 5% additional income tax tier. non working people pay a significant fixed annual fee. University is not free. $5K for the public institutions - which have limited admissions. $10K for many of the spill over private institutions. Now - about those space lasers ....

5k is almost free. And yes you pay tax to find universities. Makes sense. Paying full tuition in the USA is like paying a tax, only worse, it's a lot more.

As disgusted as I am with Israel's action over the last 80 years, put the blame where it belong.

5k is far from nothing, it is more than enough in any country than subsidize higher education.

Which is most of the world at this point.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#34

Post by yesco »

ceejayoz wrote: post #30
yesco wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to say upfront that I'm absolutely not trying to say Spain should or even needs to join this silly war. But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Iran is in fact a threat relevant to NATO considering most of it is/was within ballistic missile range. It's also a simple fact that Iran's manufacturing base has been suppor…

> But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Why lie like this? I linked the agreement; the US doesn't maintain everything. "Each Party shall bear the costs of operation and maintenance of services and installations, or parts thereof, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article which it uses exclusively, as well as the identifi…

The United States has never activated article 5. Get your facts straight before attempting to use an LLM to reply to me.

The coalition for Afghanistan was voluntary. This isn't even that, it's just flying our planes over Spain's airspace.

Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#35

Post by ceejayoz »

yesco wrote: post #34
ceejayoz wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Why lie like this? I linked the agreement; the US doesn't maintain everything. "Each Party shall bear the costs of operation and maintenance of services and installations, or parts thereof, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article which it uses exclusively, as well as the identifi…

The United States has never activated article 5. Get your facts straight before attempting to use an LLM to reply to me. The coalition for Afghanistan was voluntary. This isn't even that, it's just flying our planes over Spain's airspace. Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.

https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/intl/io/nato/index.htm

> After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history.

No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department!

> Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.

It continues to be able to use them. It has never been allowed to use them for things Spain finds objectionable.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#36

Post by yesco »

ceejayoz wrote: post #35
yesco wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States has never activated article 5. Get your facts straight before attempting to use an LLM to reply to me. The coalition for Afghanistan was voluntary. This isn't even that, it's just flying our planes over Spain's airspace. Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.

https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/intl/io/nato/index.htm > After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history. No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department! > Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be…

Glad we are on the same page, because yes, as you pointed out, it literally says here in plaintext that it was NATO Allies that activated it, not the United States.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#37

Post by ceejayoz »

yesco wrote: post #36
ceejayoz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/intl/io/nato/index.htm > After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history. No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department! > Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be…

Glad we are on the same page, because yes, as you pointed out, it literally says here in plaintext that it was NATO Allies that activated it, not the United States.

Is the US not one of those "NATO allies"?

I'm not clear on how a semantic quibble that amounts to "Spain and the rest of Europe proactively affirmed their Article 5 obligations to the US" helps your case here. You have, if anything, effectively demonstrated Spain's commitment to the agreement.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#38

Post by Octoth0rpe »

ceejayoz wrote: post #35
yesco wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States has never activated article 5. Get your facts straight before attempting to use an LLM to reply to me. The coalition for Afghanistan was voluntary. This isn't even that, it's just flying our planes over Spain's airspace. Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.

https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/intl/io/nato/index.htm > After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history. No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department! > Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be…

I hate to say this, but they're correct, if only pedantically. The claim was:

> The United States has never activated article 5

The US didn't activate it. It was:

> The decision to invoke NATO's collective self-defense provisions was undertaken at NATO's own initiative, without a request by the United States

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingenc...

Regardless, article 5 was activated _on behalf_ of the US, if not at the US's request.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#39

Post by vrganj »

yesco wrote: post #28
ceejayoz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty sure those agreements don't say "And you can tell us what to do with our defense assets whenever you want". Of course they do. https://es.usembassy.gov/agreement-on-defense-cooperation/ "To this end, Spain grants to the United States of America the use of operational and support installations and grants authorizations for use of Spanish territory, territorial sea and airspace for purposes within the bilatera…

I want to say upfront that I'm absolutely not trying to say Spain should or even needs to join this silly war. But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Iran is in fact a threat relevant to NATO considering most of it is/was within ballistic missile range. It's also a simple fact that Iran's manufacturing base has been suppor…

The base is not some favor to Spain. Who does Spain even need defending from? It is a means of regional power projection for the US, granted to them for free as a favor. They've been very ungracious guests lately.

Re: Spain shuts airspace for US planes involved in Iran war

#40

Post by ceejayoz »

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #38
ceejayoz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/intl/io/nato/index.htm > After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history. No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department! > Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be…

I hate to say this, but they're correct, if only pedantically. The claim was: > The United States has never activated article 5 The US didn't activate it. It was: > The decision to invoke NATO's collective self-defense provisions was undertaken at NATO's own initiative, without a request by the United States source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingenc... Regardless, article 5 was activated _o…

If we're gonna go to that level of splitting hairs, then I'd suggest "NATO - including Spain - did it without us even having to ask" is quite supportive of my position.
Post reply on HN