Italy didn't join Spain in this: it's just that using the Sigonella airbase for military purpose requires parliament approval, which was not scheduled on time. Meanwhile, five US military flights took off from the other base of Aviano, Northern Italy.
Aviano hosts the 31° Fighter Wing (F-16 jets) and B61-4 nuclear weapons, while Sigonella has Mq-9 Reaper drones and Ep-3 surveillance airplanes.
For context, the other main US bases in Italy are: Ghedi (Lombardia region), Camp Darby (Tuscany region), Camp Ederle (Veneto region), the two harbors of Naples and Gaeta, and some other communications infrastructures. By the way, Camp Darby is the largest US weapons and ammunition warehouse in Europe.
> Aircraft of the United States forces which are deployed in Spain, permanently or on rotation, within the agreed force level, may overfly, enter and exit Spanish air space, and use the bases specified in Annex 2 of this Agreement, with no other requirement than compliance with Spanish air traffic regulations. In order to use other bases, military airdromes and airports, the corresponding authorization shall be requested through the Permanent Committee at least 48 hours in advance.
> Aircraft flying logistics missions, operated by or for the United States forces, other than those in paragraph 1, not carrying VIPs, HAZMAT or cargo or passengers that might be controversial to Spain may overfly, enter or exit Spanish airspace and use the bases specified in Annex 2 on quarterly blanket overflight clearances authorized by the Permanent Committee.
Interestingly I did a double take when looking this up as there is also an even worse "1976 Cavalese cable car crash" in the same vicinity 22 years earlier, this time the fault of a car operator and a design weakness.
In a twist of fate, the person partially responsible for the 1976 disaster was named Schweizer. The one partially responsible in 1998 was Schweitzer.
So if we are hoping whatever nationality/occupation pair is gone that is responsible for Cavalese car crashes, you'll be hoping to eject more than just Americans (it is not clear to me whether Schweizer was Italian as the last name seems more Germanic and apparently they were a seasonal worker). Maybe instead it is more specific to eject anyone with the name Schweit?zer ...
Parliament approval, agreements, treaties. Sounds like european woke bureaucratic bullshit. Get the CEO of Italy on the phone, he'll get it done. If not, throw some more tariffs at them.
I don't know if this is a troll. But anti-woke is not slavishly following the US. Anti woke would be: "Take your troops that currently fail in the Middle East out of the EU and don't bother us with your NATO withdrawal threats. You can't even protect the Gulf region."
That is a misleading headline. Italy refused landing to flights outside normal operations without a prior request. We don't know how the Italian government would respond to a request if the US took the time to make one.
I really wish that people would distinguish between "Americans" and "the US government" (and between the latter and the Trump regime) more clearly. I am Turkish and when I am associated with the behaviour of the Turkish government (which happens when I am abroad), it is very unpleasant. I lived in the States for 7 years and have many friends there. I am guessing they would similarly find this association unpleasant.
Kinda reminds me of a story told by a Canadian streamer: his friend learned to say, in French, some phrase (I don't remember the phrase and it doesn't matter anyway) and "sorry, I only know how to say that phrase and this one in French, I'm only fluent in English". He spent a lot of effort getting the accent right to really sell it. They went to France, did the bit, and really ticked off some French people. The relevant part is that, at the end of the story, this Canadian streamer joked that those they annoyed would assume they were annoyed by Americans.
Anyway, my point is I suspect Canadian and American tourists alike will be noticeably more forthcoming about their Canadian-ness.
> As these were not logistical flights, they were not covered by the bilateral treaty governing U.S. military bases in Italy which allow for logistical and technical use; that led Defense Minister Guido Crosetto to deny the planes the use of the Sigonella base since permission in this case would need approval from the Italian parliament.
> their flight plan was not communicated in advance to the Italian air force general staff, nor had the American aircraft received authorization to land,
Sounds like they might have gotten authorization if they had just told them in advance.
More intentionally misleading propaganda. Just like France's supposed ban of its airspace to US aircrafts claimed by Trump which is, needless to say, wrong. Think about what countries benefit from spreading this misinformation through media channels.
So far it's only been the US lifting sanctions and greatly understating the military aid (including but not limited to drones) and intelligence (for targeting US and its allies) provided by Russia to Iran. In addition to all of the above, this war has been a great help to their declining finances.
We (many of us) are not fans of participating in a war without clear achievable objectives and a legal justification that also makes our lives objectively worse.
On the one hand the US has pushed for this by weakening NATO. On the other hand what's interesting is that the EU's primary defense focus is Ukraine whose primary adversary's primary defense partner is Iran, including creator of the dominant drone that Russia uses to attack Ukraine. So while it makes sense that European countries are doing what they can to avoid being targeted by Iranian retaliation, it's a pretty sad state of affairs for Europe to not be able to do much to defend its interests (in Ukraine or the Gulf). All of this will lead to a newly muscular Europe, presumably. Which is what the US has been pushing for. But the US will have to get used to getting less red carpet treatment in Europe.
I'm sure Europe would in theory prefer to be unified against Iran (for the reasons you mention, namely Russia), but the way this war was started was just too colossally stupid. It (entirely predictably) jacked up oil prices, so Iran is making more money on their exports, and Russian sanctions are being lifted. The immediate consequences of this war are directly funding our (both the US's and EU's) adversaries. I don't think fear of Iranian (para)military retaliation is much of a factor, but certainly not the main one.
I had heard that Iranian exports had increased. This [0] is the best source I can find commenting on their output either way, and it says they're exporting about 50% more. That part might be untrue, but the lack of reporting suggests that at worst that their output hasn't decreased. Whatever the change though, the price of oil has increased significantly, which makes them more money. So at present they're making anywhere from 50%-100% more money, depending on whether their exports have increased.
There was no way you go to war with Iran without oil prices rising and the straits closing temporarily. So you had a choice: be permanently deterred or take action and bear the pain. Sure Europe would like to avoid that pain for obvious reasons, but it's going to be a long-term gain in the form of a weakened Iran and a strengthened Europe. If you feel Iran and Russia are strengthened by this you're over-focusing on one key thing: oil revenue, when Iran is weakened by countless other things and Russia is weakened having their entire middle eastern strategic allies including the gulf players they've pandered up to now hostile.
> There was no way you go to war with Iran without oil prices rising and the straits closing temporarily
Agreed, but
> but it's going to be a long-term gain in the form of a weakened Iran and a strengthened Europe
I don't think this is a sure thing at all.
The fact is that the US and Israel kicked a hornets nest that everyone is stuck in the room with, and everyone else in that room is understandably upset. And (to belabor the metaphor) the only ones who those hornets were eyeing had themselves been causing trouble for the past 80 years.
To continue the metaphor, there are some that are comfortable having a hornet's nest in their bedroom and others that will take the initiative to remove it
How is Iran weakened, in what sense? It suffered economic damage and casualties for sure, but I don't think there is anything it cannot recover from. It's just a pure destructive rage from US side without thinking of any long-term strategic results.
They have put all of their resources into military technology over the last 30 years and now much of that is destroyed or degraded. They have lost their deterrence and the lawn will continue to be mowed if they do decide to attempt to rebuild it. Because the people resent the regime it's just a matter of time before things change on the ground and when that does happen assistance and economic opportunities will emerge. But until then Iran will be in this extremely degraded state
The US government were surprised that they closed the strait btw. Let’s not rewrite history to make this all sound planned and foreseen when it clearly was not.
Also currently Iran is looking stronger not weaker tbh. The Americans have really fucked it all up.
I have heard numerous people make this assertion when every single wargaming exercise has always predicted the closing of the straight. I don't understand where this is coming from.
When you say Iran is looking stronger I think you mean in some kind of relative expectation game in the media sense rather than a real hard power sense.. I would encourage you to look at the latter instead
Weakened Iran is not a given outcome. It's a possible outcome. As for Gulf players, the feel suckered by Trump now. The saudis are begging for Trump to finish the job exactly because they are afraid he won't.
Iran's relationhip to Russia is in no way strategic to EU. Overall trade between Russia and Iran is 1/400th of that of Russia <-> China trade. Breaking the relationship now would not lead to any noticeable effect on Ukraine war. Russia manufactures geran drones itself. And you will not bomb technology/knowledge transfers away anyway. Vast majority of the materials for Russia's war come from China and the rest of the world, incl. USA and Europe.
What is a complete strategic failure though is EU's support for Israel's impunity that created this war, which will negatively effect all of the EU. There should have been severe sanctions and travel bans on all Israelis long time ago, to force their government to act better. Economic losses this shithole country caused to the EU, will not be offset by any benefits Israel's<->EU trade could create for a looooong time.
Italy didn't join Spain in this: it's just that using the Sigonella airbase for military purpose requires parliament approval, which was not scheduled on time. Meanwhile, five US military flights took off from the other base of Aviano, Northern Italy.
Aviano hosts the 31° Fighter Wing (F-16 jets) and B61-4 nuclear weapons, while Sigonella has Mq-9 Reaper drones and Ep-3 surveillance airplanes.
For context, the other main US bases in Italy are: Ghedi (Lombardia region), Camp Darby (Tuscany region), Camp Ederle (Veneto region), the two harbors of Naples and Gaeta, and some other communications infrastructures. By the way, Camp Darby is the largest US weapons and ammunition warehouse in Europe.
> Meanwhile, five US military flights took off from the other base of Aviano, Northern Italy.
This may be permitted under the agreements.
I can't find the Italian version, but Spain's agreement (https://es.usembassy.gov/agreement-on-defense-cooperation/) differentiates between aircraft already based in Spain versus ones transiting through.
> Aircraft of the United States forces which are deployed in Spain, permanently or on rotation, within the agreed force level, may overfly, enter and exit Spanish air space, and use the bases specified in Annex 2 of this Agreement, with no other requirement than compliance with Spanish air traffic regulations. In order to use other bases, military airdromes and airports, the corresponding authorization shall be requested through the Permanent Committee at least 48 hours in advance.
> Aircraft flying logistics missions, operated by or for the United States forces, other than those in paragraph 1, not carrying VIPs, HAZMAT or cargo or passengers that might be controversial to Spain may overfly, enter or exit Spanish airspace and use the bases specified in Annex 2 on quarterly blanket overflight clearances authorized by the Permanent Committee.
We'll see what Italy does if asked next time.
I really hope someday no US troops will be stationed in Italy.
I'm still livid about the Cavalese disaster in which I lost few distant friends (close friends of my Veneto uncle's):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Cavalese_cable_car_crash
Interestingly I did a double take when looking this up as there is also an even worse "1976 Cavalese cable car crash" in the same vicinity 22 years earlier, this time the fault of a car operator and a design weakness.
In a twist of fate, the person partially responsible for the 1976 disaster was named Schweizer. The one partially responsible in 1998 was Schweitzer.
So if we are hoping whatever nationality/occupation pair is gone that is responsible for Cavalese car crashes, you'll be hoping to eject more than just Americans (it is not clear to me whether Schweizer was Italian as the last name seems more Germanic and apparently they were a seasonal worker). Maybe instead it is more specific to eject anyone with the name Schweit?zer ...
Parliament approval, agreements, treaties. Sounds like european woke bureaucratic bullshit. Get the CEO of Italy on the phone, he'll get it done. If not, throw some more tariffs at them.
Sad time today when it's not even clear how serious/sarcastic this comment is.
The “CEO” of Italy is a she.
Like pretty much every other word in that comment, we'll never know if the misgendering is intentional satire or not.
Not sure if the CEO of the USA knows that, he confused Spain with Brazil.
if the USA CEO was she there would have been no confusion, education and all that ... :)
> european woke bureaucratic bullshit
This may have been an attempt at rage-bait, but putting woke and bureaucracy next to each other makes it actually hilarious.
I don't know if this is a troll. But anti-woke is not slavishly following the US. Anti woke would be: "Take your troops that currently fail in the Middle East out of the EU and don't bother us with your NATO withdrawal threats. You can't even protect the Gulf region."
I can't tell if this is satire or a shocking indictment of the US education system
That is a misleading headline. Italy refused landing to flights outside normal operations without a prior request. We don't know how the Italian government would respond to a request if the US took the time to make one.
> […]if the US took the time to make one.
Is it normal for the Americans to behave this way or is this new procedure?
I really wish that people would distinguish between "Americans" and "the US government" (and between the latter and the Trump regime) more clearly. I am Turkish and when I am associated with the behaviour of the Turkish government (which happens when I am abroad), it is very unpleasant. I lived in the States for 7 years and have many friends there. I am guessing they would similarly find this association unpleasant.
Kinda reminds me of a story told by a Canadian streamer: his friend learned to say, in French, some phrase (I don't remember the phrase and it doesn't matter anyway) and "sorry, I only know how to say that phrase and this one in French, I'm only fluent in English". He spent a lot of effort getting the accent right to really sell it. They went to France, did the bit, and really ticked off some French people. The relevant part is that, at the end of the story, this Canadian streamer joked that those they annoyed would assume they were annoyed by Americans.
Anyway, my point is I suspect Canadian and American tourists alike will be noticeably more forthcoming about their Canadian-ness.
> As these were not logistical flights, they were not covered by the bilateral treaty governing U.S. military bases in Italy which allow for logistical and technical use; that led Defense Minister Guido Crosetto to deny the planes the use of the Sigonella base since permission in this case would need approval from the Italian parliament.
And:
> their flight plan was not communicated in advance to the Italian air force general staff, nor had the American aircraft received authorization to land,
Sounds like they might have gotten authorization if they had just told them in advance.
What is a logistical flight?
Cargo, passengers?
Versus combat operations.
(Joining Spain and France.)
and they can't fly over Switzerland. [1]
[1] https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/switzerland-bars-us-overflights...
Edit: I'm wrong! Yoink!
this is not true
Uh, what? They very much did not.
Retracted. Not sure where I heard that. Likely confused with Sweden
It is a war, military operation, or an aggression?
Call it what you want. Just don't use accurate terms like apartheid, genocide or war crime.
More intentionally misleading propaganda. Just like France's supposed ban of its airspace to US aircrafts claimed by Trump which is, needless to say, wrong. Think about what countries benefit from spreading this misinformation through media channels.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2026/03/31/f...
Unironically there are currently multiple US military aircraft transitting over France and Italy as I type.
I'm curious how western Europeans reconcile their supposed desire to have Russia not invade Europe with simping for Russia's #1 defense partner?
Or do they just not care because Poland and Germany are east of them?
So far it's only been the US lifting sanctions and greatly understating the military aid (including but not limited to drones) and intelligence (for targeting US and its allies) provided by Russia to Iran. In addition to all of the above, this war has been a great help to their declining finances.
We (many of us) are not fans of participating in a war without clear achievable objectives and a legal justification that also makes our lives objectively worse.
The defence against russia is something that Trump administration is trying to dismantle currently: https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-wont-divert-patriot-a...
Try actually reading this article?
If Iran is Russia's "#1 defense partner" then the issue is less for western Europeans to sort out and more for Russia to reconcile.
Does the US lifting sanctions on Iran mid-war count as simping?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d415g55nno
I think Europe just wants to be left out of it.
Not invading a country is "simping" now?
Is anyone asking them to invade?
Well I guess perhaps "invade" is inprecise language. They are being asked to join an unprovoked offsensive (rather than defensive) war.
On the one hand the US has pushed for this by weakening NATO. On the other hand what's interesting is that the EU's primary defense focus is Ukraine whose primary adversary's primary defense partner is Iran, including creator of the dominant drone that Russia uses to attack Ukraine. So while it makes sense that European countries are doing what they can to avoid being targeted by Iranian retaliation, it's a pretty sad state of affairs for Europe to not be able to do much to defend its interests (in Ukraine or the Gulf). All of this will lead to a newly muscular Europe, presumably. Which is what the US has been pushing for. But the US will have to get used to getting less red carpet treatment in Europe.
I'm sure Europe would in theory prefer to be unified against Iran (for the reasons you mention, namely Russia), but the way this war was started was just too colossally stupid. It (entirely predictably) jacked up oil prices, so Iran is making more money on their exports, and Russian sanctions are being lifted. The immediate consequences of this war are directly funding our (both the US's and EU's) adversaries. I don't think fear of Iranian (para)military retaliation is much of a factor, but certainly not the main one.
What makes you think Iran is making more money exporting oil than they were before the war?
I had heard that Iranian exports had increased. This [0] is the best source I can find commenting on their output either way, and it says they're exporting about 50% more. That part might be untrue, but the lack of reporting suggests that at worst that their output hasn't decreased. Whatever the change though, the price of oil has increased significantly, which makes them more money. So at present they're making anywhere from 50%-100% more money, depending on whether their exports have increased.
[0] https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260326-iran-says-oil-exp...
There was no way you go to war with Iran without oil prices rising and the straits closing temporarily. So you had a choice: be permanently deterred or take action and bear the pain. Sure Europe would like to avoid that pain for obvious reasons, but it's going to be a long-term gain in the form of a weakened Iran and a strengthened Europe. If you feel Iran and Russia are strengthened by this you're over-focusing on one key thing: oil revenue, when Iran is weakened by countless other things and Russia is weakened having their entire middle eastern strategic allies including the gulf players they've pandered up to now hostile.
> There was no way you go to war with Iran without oil prices rising and the straits closing temporarily
Agreed, but
> but it's going to be a long-term gain in the form of a weakened Iran and a strengthened Europe
I don't think this is a sure thing at all.
The fact is that the US and Israel kicked a hornets nest that everyone is stuck in the room with, and everyone else in that room is understandably upset. And (to belabor the metaphor) the only ones who those hornets were eyeing had themselves been causing trouble for the past 80 years.
To continue the metaphor, there are some that are comfortable having a hornet's nest in their bedroom and others that will take the initiative to remove it
How is Iran weakened, in what sense? It suffered economic damage and casualties for sure, but I don't think there is anything it cannot recover from. It's just a pure destructive rage from US side without thinking of any long-term strategic results.
They have put all of their resources into military technology over the last 30 years and now much of that is destroyed or degraded. They have lost their deterrence and the lawn will continue to be mowed if they do decide to attempt to rebuild it. Because the people resent the regime it's just a matter of time before things change on the ground and when that does happen assistance and economic opportunities will emerge. But until then Iran will be in this extremely degraded state
The US government were surprised that they closed the strait btw. Let’s not rewrite history to make this all sound planned and foreseen when it clearly was not.
Also currently Iran is looking stronger not weaker tbh. The Americans have really fucked it all up.
I have heard numerous people make this assertion when every single wargaming exercise has always predicted the closing of the straight. I don't understand where this is coming from.
When you say Iran is looking stronger I think you mean in some kind of relative expectation game in the media sense rather than a real hard power sense.. I would encourage you to look at the latter instead
Weakened Iran is not a given outcome. It's a possible outcome. As for Gulf players, the feel suckered by Trump now. The saudis are begging for Trump to finish the job exactly because they are afraid he won't.
Iran's relationhip to Russia is in no way strategic to EU. Overall trade between Russia and Iran is 1/400th of that of Russia <-> China trade. Breaking the relationship now would not lead to any noticeable effect on Ukraine war. Russia manufactures geran drones itself. And you will not bomb technology/knowledge transfers away anyway. Vast majority of the materials for Russia's war come from China and the rest of the world, incl. USA and Europe.
What is a complete strategic failure though is EU's support for Israel's impunity that created this war, which will negatively effect all of the EU. There should have been severe sanctions and travel bans on all Israelis long time ago, to force their government to act better. Economic losses this shithole country caused to the EU, will not be offset by any benefits Israel's<->EU trade could create for a looooong time.