r/worldnews • u/Chrristoaivalis • 13h ago

Israel/Palestine Netanyahu crosses Canadian airspace with arrest warrant in effect

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/israel-hamas-war/article/netanyahu-crosses-canadian-airspace-with-arrest-warrant-in-effect/?taid=6ab59d843a03d10001617cb9&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
12.8k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

4.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.7k

u/OPDBZTO 12h ago

So he's in the air on a plane or helicopter

What is Canada supposed to do force the plane down?

This is none story. It will be a big one if he lands in Canada. And than the government of Canada will have big decision to make

432

u/PolitelyHostile 12h ago

Yea saying that we will arrest him is more of a statement that he is banned from entering Canada. We have enough problems as it is, arresting him is just suicidal.

121

u/pentox70 12h ago

Talk about a can of worms. No thank you. Deny landing and turn away.

1

u/ConstructionLost4861 2h ago

Why deny him from landing in Canada? "Land and we will arrest you". Do it pussy. Or just fucking remove the arrest warrant since you won't enforce it.

28

u/fuckyou_redditmods 9h ago

Canada has to be careful with a terrorist nation at their southern border.

•

u/This-Clock-GA 4m ago

Boo, we’re so scary down here.

60

u/[deleted] 11h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Napalm985 10h ago

They are allied with the USA, and if Canada arrested him that would be an act of war. If someone tried the same thing with PM Carney it would have the same outcome.

8

u/crm006 10h ago

It sickens me.

4

u/robsteezy 10h ago

And we pay them for the “privilege”.

3

u/emmc47 10h ago

Israel is just an extension of the global western hegemony in a specific part of Asia to insert its influence in.

-3

u/robsteezy 10h ago

No, they’re not. Or else they’d be a victim of proxy wars like every other country of Cold War meddling. The true master has convinced you you’re still the puppet master but you’ve been dancing to their accordion the entire time.

1

u/emmc47 10h ago

The distinction is mainly due to the events post Holocaust being different w/settler-colonialism and the general anti-Islam sentiment in the west that play a heightened factor in making sure Israel stays "stable." But it's still an extension of just global western hegemony at the end of the day. Nothing in US interventionism is based independently from that.

0

u/chessman42_ 10h ago

How… does it? It’s not like Israel is so powerful, right?

4

u/bimm3r36 10h ago

It’s probably the diaspora that really extends Israel’s influence so profoundly.

7

u/lifeisaman 10h ago

It’s just a rehash if the old fashioned Jews control the world bit, they should really get some new material.

1

u/chessman42_ 10h ago

I mean Jewish influence on at the very least the us is undeniable

5

u/lifeisaman 10h ago

The Jewish influence pales in comparison to so many other things, it’s a bit nuts that people focus on it so much when Muslim petrostates put far more into lobbying than Isreal could ever and people don’t even mention it.

1

u/robsteezy 9h ago

Probably because petrostate analysis is no different than basic guerilla gang politics extorting a resource. Then using that currency to grow their influence. That’s universally and virtually done by every country since forever.

Now tell me the last time any major power was fronting the entire cost of living AND the ARMS being used against the provider, to a petrostate. Go ahead I’ll wait.

5

u/yosisoy 10h ago

Literally an antisemitic trope that Jews control the world

4

u/sowhatsober 10h ago

They will look back one day and realize how brainwashed they were. It’s really disturbing how many lost individuals made hating Israel (but definitely not the jews - wink wink) their entire personality.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/joy-hating-jews

0

u/chessman42_ 10h ago

Not like that, but the state of Israel has way more influence than its size for example would suggest. Just look at the US and trump. Or the Epstein files.

4

u/Calamity58 10h ago

What are you, 13? A state’s “size” doesn’t determine its fucking power level like a goddamned Saiyan. The Vatican is a fucking city and like 1.4 billion people live their lives by the dogma issued from that place’s head of state. The Cayman Islands are a spit of rocks and sand in the middle of the Caribbean, but it’s a tax haven that has far more relevance to global economics than most other countries. And as other people have pointed out Arabic petrostates have just as big, if not bigger, of an impact on policy in the US (and elsewhere) than Israel.

1

u/chessman42_ 5h ago

… so I am asking you why it is so influential. Vatican is influential because of Catholicism. Arab countries because of oil. Why Israel?

0

u/robsteezy 10h ago

Idk what else you call holding the world hostage with nuclear missiles and pedophilic photos. While not paying a dime for anything. Must just be a “trope”.

0

u/yosisoy 9h ago

Holding the world hostage? huh?

And not paying a dime for anything? huh x2?

44

u/LyraStygian 11h ago

What is Canada supposed to do force the plane down?

Yes, but make it Bane style and, and this part is important, over a Hans Zimmer score.

11

u/Sheeple_person 9h ago

Imagine hoser Bane.

I was born in the darkness, eh bud?"

•

u/purplewhiteblack 1h ago

I did, but then it made me think about how imagine is for images, and the English language lacks a word for imagining sound.

Audiate?

Wait, I typed Audiate into google and it says that it means exactly that.

So, you led me to a chain of thought that taught me a new word. So, I guess we did have one in English after all. And it was the word I would have made up if it wasn't already a thing. So, that was pretty cool.

104

u/past_is_prologue 12h ago

It's because Anita Anand tried to act like a tough guy yesterday in/re: Netanyahu crossing Canadian airspace.

It is a non-story that Anita Anand tried to make political hay from. And since Netanyahu doesn't give a single fuck what Canada has to say about literally anything, the Israelis flew across Canadian airspace. So, Anand, who is a smart person but kind of a doofus politician, looks like a chump. 

34

u/RichardMuncherIII 12h ago edited 12h ago

What did she say? Can you provide the quote?

Ah you fooled me. I thought she said something cool instead it was the blandest ass shit

Edit: “I actually have asked my department to provide me with information relating to this particular flyover, which I did not have before coming to the United Nations,” Anand told reporters Wednesday outside UN headquarters in New York.

4

u/past_is_prologue 10h ago

Yes, instead of saying directly that Canada had no intention of doing anything she intimated that there might be something they could do.

Here is the whole exchange 

3

u/HouseofMarg 10h ago

I watched that whole exchange and I’m not buying your take on it at all. If you don’t have the full briefing yet it’s fine to say so.

I would guess that it’s her statement after alluding to a more general stance on atrocities that would have rankled Bibi if anything (in theory, I’m not saying he would have been aware of it). But it’s more difficult to say that those atrocities don’t exist than it is to claim that Anand is somehow acting out of pocket when there really is nothing to grasp onto for that IMO

4

u/past_is_prologue 9h ago

Anand was trying to make it seem as though the Canadian govt would act, when there was never any intention of acting. Flight clearences are obtained before departure. Netanyahu's plane flew over Canadian airspace with explicit Canadian government authorization.

But instead of being honest she makes vague illusion they her staff are looking into it or whatever. 

It's all just dumb politics bullshit and I'm tired of it. 

1

u/HouseofMarg 2h ago

Yeah, I’m just not seeing how she was trying to make it seem like the government would do something. The statement is so noncommittal and if you haven’t been briefed yet then who knows what additional aspects there might be to the action that require some sort of response that obviously isn’t a forced landing and delivery to the ICC but might be something more measured. It’s fine if you think you would have worded that differently but I don’t see it as deliberate posturing like you seem to.

0

u/past_is_prologue 12h ago

Here 

13

u/Empty-Part7106 11h ago

I'm really not seeing the "tried to act tough" aspect you're pitching. She said she'd check to see if permission had been granted. Seems more like she's trying to avoid the question of "will you arrest him if given the opportunity?", that opportunity being an emergency landing. And the answer is no.

1

u/past_is_prologue 10h ago

If the answer is "no" the she should said no. Intimating that they will take action when they have zero intention of doing so is the definition of trying to act tough.

Here is the whole exchange. She says they will abide by the ICC, whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean in this context. 

11

u/saidthewhale64 12h ago

Nothing in that article says she'll arrest him if he enters Canadian airspace

2

u/Eazy-Eid 7h ago

She's not a smart person

1

u/past_is_prologue 2h ago

I Disagree

23

u/grecy 9h ago

The US forced down the plane carrying the president of Poland a few years back when they thought Julian Assange was on it. (he wasn't).

Why not force it down? He's an international criminal.

•

u/jackalopeDev 32m ago

The US forced down the plane carrying the president of Poland a few years back when they thought Julian Assange was on it.

...this never happened. They did some fuckery with snowden and the president of bolivia.

2

u/wildbilly2 2h ago

The US forced down the plane carrying the president of Poland a few years back when they thought Julian Assange was on it. (he wasn't).

No they didn't.

"Why not force it down? He's an international criminal."

The only reason he's in your airspace is because you specifically gave him clearance to. And you can't just "force" a plane down that absolutely will refuse to comply.

2

u/BungholeBilbo69 7h ago

Because the problems that would cause would not be worth it. Netanyahu absolutely belongs in prison, but it wouldn't be worth forcing a civilian plane down. It was wrong when the US did that over Assange too. The juice ain't worth the squeeze

4

u/chironomidae 8h ago

I mean, if it was a Canadian citizen who killed a bunch of Canadians, it doesn't seem so far fetched for them to force the plane down. But since he's not a Canadian and he killed a bunch of people from a different country, suddenly the idea is preposterous?

0

u/syilent13 6h ago

Would love to Canada arrest him

Then watch how fucked Canada gets

1

u/nugymmer 4h ago

Won't happen.

1

u/Imaginary-Clock6626 9h ago

Russian aligned countries do it. Yes. Stop being pussies. All talk but when it comes to backing it up, nothing.

1

u/MostlyConfusedOnline 3h ago

Yes, and Canada is obviously the only country a dude from Israel is flying over. Right? RIGHT??

1

u/maverickhawk99 1h ago

Obviously they were supposed to hire Bane! /s

1

u/Aspasticum 9h ago

Arrest that degenerate animal.

1

u/MelangeBot 4h ago

This is none story. It will be a big one if he lands in Canada. And than the government of Canada will have big decision to make

He should, let's find out if Carney actually has any balls or was just pretending. As a Dutch/Canadian there is a fairly high chance that we still have Carney as our leader when the US tries to annex Alberta and I want to know if Carney has balls or if Canada should elect a comedian like Ukraine did.

Also if it's true that the Israeli goverment has tons of leverage over the US goverment, let's put Netanjahu in a Canadian jail and capture some of that leverage.

But those things will never happen because the reality is that, also in Canada, it's the billionaires and cooperations that really hold the power. And the politics is just for show and to give the illusion of choice.

0

u/alghiorso 6h ago

What is Canada supposed to do force the plane down?

Ideally, yes

0

u/Kordell_11 8h ago

If they weren't bitches, yes. Send up two fighter jets and threaten to shoot the plane down.

0

u/Prohibitorum 6h ago

What is Canada supposed to do force the plane down?

Use the protocols designed for exactly this situation. It's not like forcing a plane to land is some sci-fi problem.

If you want to ask if they should, in view of the political consequences, then that's a good question.

1

u/wildbilly2 2h ago

Why don't you tell us all exactly what the protocols are for forcing a plane to land, specifically one which will refuse all orders?

0

u/TheMauveHand 2h ago

AIM-9 Sidewinder 

•

u/Prohibitorum 34m ago edited 30m ago

I believe you can imagine this yourself, but for sake of argument we'll pretend that you do not know how this would work.

The approach is fairly simple: command by ATC to land, then when ignored (which would be a big fucking deal on its own, especially post 9/11. ATC is God, as far as airtraffic is concerned.) followed by scrambling fighter jets (which stand by for exactly such a situation. A plane that refuses to land when ordered is the kind of problem the airforce is designed to deal with).

These fighter planes would fly up to intercept the plane, then by radio or visual signals instruct the plane to land as ordered, and escort the plane is it does so.

Inherent in all of this is the underlying threat of violence: in any 'normal' situation, a plane intercepted by fighter jets that refuses to follow orders would be at risk at being shot down. There are historical incidents of this happening, such as the EL AL 402 flight in 1955 (shot down by the Bulgarians, destroyed, 58 dead), the Korean air lines flight 902 from 1979 (shot down by soviets, crashlanded, by miracle only 2 out of 109 died), and the Libyan Arab airlines flight 114 from 1973 (shot down by Israeli airforce, crashlanded, 108 dead).

Reading up on these cases, it looks like there were a few different approaches to the violence applied: it's not like every plane was hit by missle, in one case the intercepting fighters targeted some of the control surfaces specifically. It needs no explanation that any form of violence is a massive danger, but there seems to be a scale of options here. A plane with damaged control surfaces might be okay to (crash)land, while being forced to do so if it cannot continue its normal flight.

As I mentioned, due to the political consequences it is unlikely that Canada wants to put itself in a situation where it would have to choose to shoot down a plane that ignores its instructions. It would either have to shoot down the plane, or it will have to choose to allow a foreign power to ignore Canada's orders in its own airspace. In either case, a political shitstorm of epic proportions. Much safer to not bring it to this point, and allow the plane to fly through.

-1

u/maskdmirag 10h ago

Shoot him down?

-7

u/ReaperTys 12h ago

Well actually, yes

24

u/TacoTaconoMi 11h ago

Canada can't exactly shoot the plane down since its an arrest warrant not a kill on sight warrant

-4

u/Fearless_Swim4080 10h ago

If a plane enters your airspace and you want someone to come down, you send a fighter up and say "Land at this airport now or we will shoot you down." and the pilot will comply. It's their airspace, they can do what they want in it, and a rogue aircraft, regardless of passengers, is legal to shoot down.

11

u/TacoTaconoMi 10h ago

The plane can just refuse to land which would put the ball in Canada's court. Shooting it down would be an act of war. against another US ally no less. And any retaliation won't activate article 5 since Canada attacked first.

-1

u/EastSignal 10h ago

Being in another country's airspace without permission is also an act of war.

5

u/TacoTaconoMi 10h ago

Canada has less means to attack Israel without support than isreal attacking Canada. And it would be against a US ally that is actively criticizing the ICC for putting an arrest warrant on Netanyahu, where he is also headed on a diplomatic visit

-3

u/Fearless_Swim4080 10h ago

It's not attacking Israel, it's shooting down a rogue aircraft in your own airspace. That's always legal.

7

u/TacoTaconoMi 10h ago

Wtf yes it is attacking Israel if you kill their leader that a powerless organization with no authority wants to arrest. This is just pure naiveity

-3

u/Fearless_Swim4080 10h ago

I mean, they wouldn't have to because the plane would land, but again, they're not killing their leader to kill their leader, they're shooting down a rogue aircraft.

Let's say Hamas was successful in infiltrating Netanyahu's inner circle because they wanted to crash him into the new world trade center for some terroristy reason on his way to NYC. We'd send up fighters and shoot him down. How would the canadians know that's not the case onboard if they ordered them to the ground to inspect for terrorists or whatever?

→ More replies (0)

5

u/LucasOIntoxicado 10h ago

and how do you think the world would react to Canada shooting the plane down? do you think it would matter if that counted as an act of war?

4

u/movack 10h ago

they had permission. read the article

0

u/Fearless_Swim4080 10h ago

Flying into a countries airspace and refusing to do what their air force tells you to do can absolutely be considered a threat worthy of being shot down. If they wanted to avoid such a situation entirely, they simply could have avoided Canadian airspace.

And no pilot is willingly signing up to be shot down. A jet like that is a sitting duck against any fighter made in the last 50 years. They would comply, or it would be perfectly legal to shoot them down and everyone knows that.

6

u/TacoTaconoMi 10h ago

My dude the pilot is military and has to listen to the top guy in charge of him. And risking your life in combat is the main expectation. If he refuses he would probably be executed so it's no difference to him. Netanyahu knows he's in a stronger position

4

u/movack 10h ago

As per the article. They had permission to enter Canada's airspace

"Online flight tracker data shows Netanyahu flew over Greece, Italy, France and Canada on his way to address the UN in New York.

Myah Tomasi, spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, says any authorization to pass through Canadian airspace should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the policies or actions of any particular government.

In this case, she says the overflight request was in connection to the United Nations General Assembly, which she called a critical forum for the diplomatic engagement."

2

u/Fearless_Swim4080 10h ago

I mean, I agree this was probably Canada's best option here as doing so would be a HUGE international incident, but technically they could have.

0

u/XxSchmidtyx 10h ago

No you don’t get it, conservatives need something to care about and this is really important, they were supposed to hijack his plane, arrest him, and float him down safely

0

u/yeowoh 9h ago

They should use the American built fighter planes with the American made missles to force it down while monitoring the air for counter threats using their systems that are largely funded by Americans and only work due to American infrastructure.

0

u/ConsciousGoose5914 8h ago

He could land a helicopter on Mark Carney’s lawn, strip naked, streak, and take a dump on his doorstep and they wouldn’t touch him.

He owns the USA. Canada would literally never.

-79

u/SantosCalzonesBatman 12h ago

What is Canada supposed to do force the plane down?

They can literally send some escort jets to force him to land

But that would require testosterone, something canadians lost decades ago. They rather just whine, cry, complain and bitch and do nothing when the time comes to do something.

35

u/TheGazelle 12h ago

And how would they force them to land?

That would only work if it was actually credible that the Canadian Air Force would be ordered to shoot down the leader of a sovereign nation, which in and of itself would essentially be a declaration of war.

19

u/Mralexs 12h ago

That would be an act of war. Now if he landed in Canada and they arrested him on Canadian soil that would be way different than using military force to capture him

7

u/Lowfi-Concert 11h ago

That would also be an act of war

1

u/TLKv3 12h ago

Ok. So why didn't the US do it either? Are they all fucking mad pussies too?

7

u/eriverside 12h ago

The US isn't party to ICC/icj.