this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
82 points (98.8% liked)

World News

48074 readers
1835 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

WTF!?

top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Good to know Lockheed Martin has the same strangle hold on the UK as the US. You guys might want to fix that before Nigel or Boris make themselves king or supreme chancellor.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Considering how well the F35 did against Iran, I expect more F35 purchases from Europe going forward. I’m not aware of any European jets with comparable stealth and radar capabilities.

[–] Anonymaus@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

F35 are too expensive and if you buy american you dont support domestic weapon manufacturers

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They have incredible value, actually. I'm not sure what cheaper system your thinking of, but none come anywhere close to it's general capabilities.

If you factor in the development process it might not be such a great deal. But, you're not at this point.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Sure, but those domestic manufacturers are going to need to work on developing actual stealth airframes if they want any business. That takes time that Europe isn’t currently comfortable with at the moment

[–] Anonymaus@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Thats true, that right now eu doesn't have its own stealth fighter, but I dont think a few dozens of f35 is gonna make that much of a difference, I think we need more of cheaper planes that are easily replaceable

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I think we need more of cheaper planes that are easily replaceable

Doesn’t Europe have a good number of airframes that fit that need? Rafales, Eurofighters, Gripens come to mind. F18’s too, but I recognize those aren’t domestic.

I look at these F35’s as a the current best solution for SEAD and air dominance roles in a potential conflict. Once that’s taken care of these other less capable platforms could play their part.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There's no equivalent jet in general. And for good reason - the requirements were insane and the development process was both massively slow and unfathomably expensive.

In the long run, you have to wonder if sensors will move to any number of alternatives to radar reflections, but word is that stealth is still pretty (war)game-breaking ATM.

It's just that the US has privileged access to all the software...

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Didn't Israel lose one? And this further sinks you into a position of reliance on empire America. Like who are you going to fight with these? Iran?

OK I thought just the photos were AI. Looks like they've yet to loose one.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Unless Israel has giant pilots to go alongside their space lasers, none have been shot down, to my knowledge. I’ve seen footage of some of their unmanned drones being taken out, so you may be conflating the two?

Oh, and Europe is pretty much solely worried about Russia. They want systems that can suppress Russian air defenses. Iran operates (or at least, they used to) Russian air defense systems such as S-300 and Tor M1 that it appears the F35 has handily dealt with.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago

No, it was all over .ml that they had, but that was misinformation. It was telling that it was all Iranian-sounding news agencies that were being posted.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

They just need to supports Trumps nobel peace prize and their journey to the dark side will be complete. Starmer will be allowed to come to the US and pick up the papers at Trumps feet every day from now on.

[–] remon@ani.social 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It was a bit odd that they were going to use the B varient even for their land-based fleet.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think the advantage there is they don't need a full airfield to operate from, but if the UK has lost all it's airfields, somebody's getting nuked.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Unless the US is the enemy and just disables the UK's fighters, stops maintenance and support, etc.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

The F35 is a global product, with quite a few countries involved in manufacturing. I do think Europe and the UK could keep them flying without the US.

Hell, Iran kept their F14s going for many decades without US support.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

So basically, nuclear-armed planes and new warheads. That's good. It was almost all on the French before. I wonder if Canada could sign on to collaborate and host UK nukes.

The F-35 thing is questionable, but lots of non-US countries depend on them and manufacture the parts (and they're great planes). In the long run I wonder if a custom ROM for the things might be in the cards, in defiance of the current agreements.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Canada 100% needs nukes. I used to be against it but Trump's bullying has changed my opinion of that.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Proliferation is bad, though. If there's any chance we can host one of the existing nuclear powers like the UK we should. Failing that, it becomes a much more difficult debate.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I agree

[–] nthavoc@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Looks like the arms race is ramping up.

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Uk shoudln't be allowed to harry jeta that can carry nukes. Israel should bomb the uk \s

[–] realitista@lemmy.world -5 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Good to see UK step up in this regard, Europe needs to bolster its own nuclear deterrent independent of the USA as the USA is no longer a trustable partner.

[–] Humanius@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I'm not sure if buying American equipment is a good way to rid ourselves of our dependence on America.
It allows America to control our supply of spare parts and software updates, and it doesn't bolster the European defence industry.

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Obviously having an EU alternative to the F35 would be ideal, but it will take a long time and a lot of money to develop. For now there isn't another option.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"According to the October 2024 report from the NNSA, it has also been certified to fly on the B-2, F-16, and German Air Force PA-200 Tornado jets, and is working towards certification on the Italian Air Force’s Tornados and the US Air Force’s B-21 bomber."

Meaning the German PA-200 the UK just retired in 2019 could have been certified to carry those warheads... But you probably would rather have warheads not made in America either

[–] remon@ani.social 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The airframes are at the end of their life, Germany is getting F-35s specifically to replace the ageing Tornados as well.

[–] rumimevlevi@lemmings.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is russia attacking the uk eminent?

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Probably not, although Russia keeps jerking off to fan fiction about nuking a tidal wave across the island.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (3 children)

What does the EU have to do with the UK?

[–] remon@ani.social 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

A history of joint airplane development.

[–] Aliktren@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Theyre not a facist state

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Okay replace EU with Europe

[–] remon@ani.social 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

A lot of the F-35 parts are produced in Europe, it's mostly the software that is a concern. But it's not like there are any alternatives right now. Developing a new European plane will take decades.

[–] warrenson@lemmy.nz 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would think the software would be a little more concerning, if there is any truth to this article https://eutoday.net/germany-concerned-over-f-35-kill-switch/

[–] remon@ani.social 2 points 1 week ago

As I said, there are some concerns, but no, there is no out-right "kill switch" or any remote control capability.

Really the biggest risk is the US withholding future software updates for a while, forcing operators to implement their own software packages for those the US will no longer provide updates for.

[–] Redex68@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm extremely doubtful of this. Just the chance that a software kill switch exists is way too big of a threat for the US itself. Imagine if Russia or China managed to hack into their systems and get a hold of it, instantly bricking almost the entire US airforce. That would be catastrophic.

[–] warrenson@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 week ago
[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Yeah bolster your military with a jet fighter that requires updates from a single source controlled by another country. I'm sure there will never be a problem with that arrangement

[–] koper@feddit.nl 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

By buying American aircraft?

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As opposed to what alternative? Do you have a European 5th generation stealth fighter bomber in your pocket that you've been keeping secret?

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's the spirit! Lock in to a multi-billion dollar contract for jets that are still largely delayed for delivery under other contracts because "what other choice do we have?"

At least the F35 makes sense for Europe given its range, but having one option and one option only is a massive problem. Europe/UK should really develop their own, instead of creating a deadline for no reason and compromising to meet that artificial deadline. If an enemy finds a flaw in the F35 and everyone is overcommitted to the F35 then what, we all shit the bed and hope our new overlords are merciful?

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I think this will happen eventually, but we have immediate threats which need to be countered with what's available today, we can't wait 20 years to do something about them.

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Never mind the American planes... these planes if nuclear-armed will be armed with American-owned bombs that will require American authorisation to arm.

[–] Visstix@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The USA can remotely deactivate those airplanes though.

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's never been verified and pretty much every European defense expert has stated that it's not the case.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Has anyone actually said it's impossible? We're talking about 8 million lines of absolutely proprietary code; it's not.

The US has not advertised any such capability, though.

[–] realitista@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well yes proving a negative is usually not possible. In this case maybe it is but it would be such exhaustive work that no one would probably trust the result anyway.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yep. And the US has every incentive and opportunity to include some such thing. Up until now, allied nations have just assumed scenarios where they'd use it against us were impossible.