386
US warns they will send fighter jets into Canadian airspace if F-35 deal doesn’t go through | The Independent
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
386 points (93.9% liked)
News
34584 readers
3578 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That’s technically a declaration of war, right?
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.
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.
Pretty sure that is the exact explanation that Russia uses when it violates Finnish and Swedish airspace.
And neither Finland nor Sweden are at war with Russia. Bullshit scare tactic used by fucking putin yes, but it's not itself an incitement to war. At least, it isn't generally treated as such.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
For most countries in NATO the last time was WWII, fwiw.
That would be correct for the two countries at present. For the U.S., it's 1942. For Canada, it's 1941.