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.
> Someone is trying to get the message across that Italy has decided to suspend the use of bases for U.S. assets.
> Something that's simply false, because the bases are active, in use, and nothing has changed.
> The Government continues to do what all Italian Governments have always done in full adherence to the commitments made in Parliament and to the line reiterated in the Supreme Defense Council as well, in continuity with all previous Councils over the decades.
> International agreements clearly regulate and distinguish what requires specific Government authorization (for which it has been decided to always involve Parliament), without which it is not possible to grant anything, and what is instead considered technically authorized because it is included in the agreements.
> A minister only has to ensure they are respected.
> There is no third option.
> Finally, I want to reiterate that there is no cooling or tension with the U.S., because they know the rules that have governed their presence in Italy since 1954 just as well as we do.
> no cooling or tension with the U.S., because they know the rules
Not to add to the fake news cycle, but since the US seems fine in abandoning international agreements (at least for climate and nuclear weapons,) this comes across as blue-eyed or disingenuous.
> 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 ...
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.
It should feel unpleasant. I don't believe Americans are a victim of an oppressive regime and I don't think they get to abdicate responsibility for their government's actions by asking the world to make that distinction. Because I certainly don't get a choice of who I trade with and who is threatening my country's existence.
To put simply: the best peaceful tool I feel that I have to protect my children's future is to maximize the embarassment, shame, and personal disgust of those who the U.S Government represents. Those who have a vote and a voice in their town square. Those who can protest or strike. The goal is to make current levels of domestic inaction intolerable. I'm delighted by the No Kings turnout. That's a good start.
If we get to a point where Americans by and large do not believe they have any power over their democracy, and that they're helpless victims of an oppressive government, I think my perspective would change in the same way I don't think Iranians are to be expected to deal with their government.
I should be clear because this is a very pointed perspective: I don't dislike Americans. As a Canadian it's inevitable that I am close friends with countless Americans. There's a number of them in my very close family. But I believe they bear responsibility for their government because I believe the U.S. is, for now, still a democracy.
> the best peaceful tool I feel that I have to protect my children's future is to maximize the embarassment, shame, and personal disgust of those who the U.S Government represents. Those who have a vote and a voice in their town square. Those who can protest or strike. The goal is to make current levels of domestic inaction intolerable. I'm delighted by the No Kings turnout. That's a good start.
And I’ll vote for the people that prevent and/or limit the damage you wish to cause to the current administration and its supporters. Especially if it means using privacy laws to prevent doxxing of such individuals or any adverse action against them.
Well, your approach requires the collection of identities associated with particular political alignment(s). And that you need both pieces linked together for it to work - where neither alignment nor identity mean anything separately.
Aside from public figures, that is very much in the realm of doxxing.
You don't need to gather any identifies to document simply quite a stupid group that will gladly scream out to the world of their own accord how stupid it is. Magas don't even need any one else, they are quite happy to screech mindlessly anywhere and everywhere.
And you still didn't say how you will "prevent" others from embarassing the administration and it's voters without violating 1A or even why you feel so triggered at criticisms of these idiots that you get so passionate to the point of violating the constitution to prevent them being shown for their stupidities.
What exactly do you think "my approach" is btw lmfao?
edit: Weren't you whining just a few days ago of bluesky being too cloistered, first I don't understand how a website that anyone is free to join with even less details than twitter is more cloistered, and more importantly why is cloistering and shielding a group from criticism suddenly good when its magas? It's pretty hilarious I have to say.
The majority could have voted for a different government if they didn't want this one. I could understand this argument somewhere else, but the US has fair elections and voted for this twice.
Apparently Usians living in sweden have been complaining that swedes assume they aren't trump supporters.
edit: also it's the USA doctrine to oppress people whose government you dislike in the hope that they might rebel, so in their case it's completely fair.
History is full of such incidents. Isn't US have been using EU air space to conduct strikes in other countries? Is not EU kept silence for the election stolen in Pakistan? Is EU kept silence when hundreds of people were killed by Pakistan Army in 2024 and 2025? Is not EU kept Pakistan 2024 election report unpublished for 2 years? Why do EU support Pakistan Army's illegal rule? Oh, and Isn't NATO has been killing in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan?
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
103 comments
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.
> Someone is trying to get the message across that Italy has decided to suspend the use of bases for U.S. assets.
> Something that's simply false, because the bases are active, in use, and nothing has changed.
> The Government continues to do what all Italian Governments have always done in full adherence to the commitments made in Parliament and to the line reiterated in the Supreme Defense Council as well, in continuity with all previous Councils over the decades.
> International agreements clearly regulate and distinguish what requires specific Government authorization (for which it has been decided to always involve Parliament), without which it is not possible to grant anything, and what is instead considered technically authorized because it is included in the agreements.
> A minister only has to ensure they are respected.
> There is no third option.
> Finally, I want to reiterate that there is no cooling or tension with the U.S., because they know the rules that have governed their presence in Italy since 1954 just as well as we do.
https://x.com/GuidoCrosetto/status/2038945070833897586
> no cooling or tension with the U.S., because they know the rules
Not to add to the fake news cycle, but since the US seems fine in abandoning international agreements (at least for climate and nuclear weapons,) this comes across as blue-eyed or disingenuous.
> 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'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
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 ...
> 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.
> […]if the US took the time to make one.
Is it normal for the Americans to behave this way or is this new procedure?
To put simply: the best peaceful tool I feel that I have to protect my children's future is to maximize the embarassment, shame, and personal disgust of those who the U.S Government represents. Those who have a vote and a voice in their town square. Those who can protest or strike. The goal is to make current levels of domestic inaction intolerable. I'm delighted by the No Kings turnout. That's a good start.
If we get to a point where Americans by and large do not believe they have any power over their democracy, and that they're helpless victims of an oppressive government, I think my perspective would change in the same way I don't think Iranians are to be expected to deal with their government.
I should be clear because this is a very pointed perspective: I don't dislike Americans. As a Canadian it's inevitable that I am close friends with countless Americans. There's a number of them in my very close family. But I believe they bear responsibility for their government because I believe the U.S. is, for now, still a democracy.
> the best peaceful tool I feel that I have to protect my children's future is to maximize the embarassment, shame, and personal disgust of those who the U.S Government represents. Those who have a vote and a voice in their town square. Those who can protest or strike. The goal is to make current levels of domestic inaction intolerable. I'm delighted by the No Kings turnout. That's a good start.
And I’ll vote for the people that prevent and/or limit the damage you wish to cause to the current administration and its supporters. Especially if it means using privacy laws to prevent doxxing of such individuals or any adverse action against them.
Aside from public figures, that is very much in the realm of doxxing.
And you still didn't say how you will "prevent" others from embarassing the administration and it's voters without violating 1A or even why you feel so triggered at criticisms of these idiots that you get so passionate to the point of violating the constitution to prevent them being shown for their stupidities.
Or to film/interview people in public or quote their own social media posts?
I searched for maga stupid and picked up a random video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xue1itaEPpE you tell me who its doxxing.
Tell me in just what ways you wish to violate the 1A to suppress these activities.
edit: Weren't you whining just a few days ago of bluesky being too cloistered, first I don't understand how a website that anyone is free to join with even less details than twitter is more cloistered, and more importantly why is cloistering and shielding a group from criticism suddenly good when its magas? It's pretty hilarious I have to say.
>And I’ll vote for the people that prevent and/or limit the damage you wish to cause to the current administration and its supporters.
Be honest and say you wish to abolish the First Amendment instead of this weaselly nonsense.
edit: also it's the USA doctrine to oppress people whose government you dislike in the hope that they might rebel, so in their case it's completely fair.
> 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.
Versus combat operations.
[1] https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/switzerland-bars-us-overflights...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d415g55nno
I think Europe just wants to be left out of it.
>
That is going too far.Ironic.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2026/03/31/f...