- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: France denies use of its airspace…what if the U.S. did it anyway
Posted on 3/31/26 at 12:48 pm to Covingtontiger77
Posted on 3/31/26 at 12:48 pm to Covingtontiger77
Our “ allies “ have always been out for their own self interest no matter how much it hurt us. Remember in the Iraq war we had an entire army in Turkey that planned on making a second front from the northwest ? And the turkey changed their mind? We need to get out of nato and let them buy their arms full price from us.
1
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:20 pm to jeffsdad
Macron finally learned to sit like his wife... and his daddy ... lmao
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:22 pm to prouddawg
Out of NATO is the only answer. It has to happen
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:40 pm to Covingtontiger77
Well, doo-doo. They have denied us the use of their airspace for military flights. (They did this in 1986 when Reagan sent a bunch of F-111's to bomb Khadafi as well.)
Maybe we should honor that decision by ceasing all domestic US flights that are scheduled to enter French airspace as well.
Maybe we should honor that decision by ceasing all domestic US flights that are scheduled to enter French airspace as well.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:49 pm to prouddawg
quote:
We should and will comply with their wishes. We should also GTFO of NATO, like yesterday.
I don’t understand this.
The anti-NATO movement just feels like degrading geopolitical relationships with other democracies for no real reason.
We’re not going to spend less money on defense if we leave NATO.
It’s also a defensive alliance. We engaged unilaterally with Israel. It’s normal to consult NATO if you want NATO’s help. Can’t really hold that against them when the only time article 5 was ever invoked was in defense of the US.
The largest foreign intervention prior to this war was Ukraine/Russia… that’s not a NATO thing.
Am I missing something? What are we losing by being part of NATO?
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:58 pm to DeathByTossDive225
We fund NATO we fund nato training in places like Geilenkirchen.
We are not getting our money's worth from these muzzie overloaded countries
We are not getting our money's worth from these muzzie overloaded countries
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:01 pm to Jbird
quote:
We fund NATO we fund nato training in places like Geilenkirchen
Want to guess who uses the most resources at these places, by an enormous margin?
Hint, it’s a nation in the western hemisphere and its capital is not Ottawa.
We build, rent, own, etc facilities in Europe because WE use them. It’s for our use. Cooperation with NATO is how we get them to host.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:02 pm to Indefatigable
No shite?
Until we can't fricking use them.
Until we can't fricking use them.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:08 pm to Jbird
quote:
No shite? Until we can't fricking use them.
Italy isn’t saying we can’t use Sigonella or Aviano.
They denied this specific flight of bombers because it wasn’t pre-authorized. If I read that correctly.
We have no relevant bases in France, and Spain isn’t denying our use of Rota. Only the overflight airspace.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:09 pm to Indefatigable
Well I understand that situation.
Now Spain and France overflight?
Now Spain and France overflight?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:10 pm to Indefatigable
Never been to Moron Air Base I take it?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:11 pm to Covingtontiger77
why we need more carriers.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:11 pm to Jbird
quote:
Now Spain and France overflight?
Are they being petty and self-righteous? Sure. But we gave them that opening on a platter.
If we wanted NATO or allied cooperation here, we should have consulted with them ahead of time and secured it. I can’t wrap my mind around the notion that we can just start a shitshow by ourselves and then get mad when our friends aren’t all in on smearing shite on their chests too. That perspective just doesn’t make sense to me. They don’t owe us fealty on everything we want to unilaterally do.
Why would they? Bombing runs aren’t going to open the strait of Hormuz or accomplish permanent change in Iran. The Europeans know that, and I know they know that because everyone over the age of 12 knows that.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 3:13 pm
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:14 pm to Jbird
Appreciate you answering the question in good faith. I expected to just get dogpiled.
Assuming the only reason we can’t use some of them right now is that we acted without looping in allies, would sunsetting those facilities be worth it?
If we get a NATO-approved operation, we are guaranteed access. If not, might still get access to some.
But if they don’t exist or we aren’t a member, guaranteed no access.
If I believed leaving NATO would result in overall reduced spending, I could see the argument. But if anything I think it would be a strong argument to justify increased defense spending.
There’s this short-sighted notion lately that we can just brute force our way through everything, but it’s not how diplomacy or geopolitical relations work.
quote:
Until we can't fricking use them.
Assuming the only reason we can’t use some of them right now is that we acted without looping in allies, would sunsetting those facilities be worth it?
If we get a NATO-approved operation, we are guaranteed access. If not, might still get access to some.
But if they don’t exist or we aren’t a member, guaranteed no access.
If I believed leaving NATO would result in overall reduced spending, I could see the argument. But if anything I think it would be a strong argument to justify increased defense spending.
There’s this short-sighted notion lately that we can just brute force our way through everything, but it’s not how diplomacy or geopolitical relations work.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:15 pm to Indefatigable
We have dealt with this shite since El Dorado Canyon.
This jerking us around isn't something new
The difference in this case is these twats are scared of the immigrants they have pumped into the continent.
Try getting dip clearances and pprs with these fricks.
This jerking us around isn't something new
The difference in this case is these twats are scared of the immigrants they have pumped into the continent.
Try getting dip clearances and pprs with these fricks.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:17 pm to DeathByTossDive225
Lol NATO was all in on the lead from behind Odyssey Dawn.
Again they have taken us for granted for decades.
There is a reason Poland and former eastern Bloc countries are build bases for us to use
Again they have taken us for granted for decades.
There is a reason Poland and former eastern Bloc countries are build bases for us to use
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:18 pm to Jbird
I will say I’m surprised that Italy made the move—which tells me there’s more to that story.
Quick but related tangent—did Ford’s air wing disembark to Sigonella or is it sitting on the flight deck in Split?
Quick but related tangent—did Ford’s air wing disembark to Sigonella or is it sitting on the flight deck in Split?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:20 pm to Indefatigable
Interesting question not sure.
They played a game with dip clearances and pprs
Can't wait to here the back story.
We don't launch aircraft until those are in place.
Dealt with these ducks moving aircraft in and out of the Gulf for years
They played a game with dip clearances and pprs
Can't wait to here the back story.
We don't launch aircraft until those are in place.
Dealt with these ducks moving aircraft in and out of the Gulf for years
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:28 pm to Jbird
quote:
They played a game with dip clearances and pprs Can't wait to here the back story.
Agreed. Sicily either wasn’t the original destination/stopover or there’s some bullshite afoot. Either way there’s a story.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:29 pm to Indefatigable
Even if it wasn't the primary transit airfield your pprs and dips have alternate divert airfields.
Again something is fricky here
Again something is fricky here
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News