Hacker News Reader

Comment by vinay427 | Hacker News Reader

This isn't space unilaterally claimed by the US. It is delegated by the ICAO, as one of the articles using that image mentions [1]. If the US has the infrastructure to control that airspace, and typically charges less than nearby countries such as Canada, then I see no objection to US control.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air#First_free...

View on HN

>then I see no objection to US control.

The fact that it seems to give the US free rein to kidnap any passengers entering that area doesn't strike you as problematic?

You are confusing airspace under US air traffic control and US airspace. Those areas are still international waters.

I am assuming that air traffic control can influence the paths those planes take.

They can of course influence paths, but they're not going to be able to tell some random plane in the Western Pacific to fly to the US, and I'm not even sure they'd have the legal power to order you to land somewhere in particular until you're actually flying over US territory.

They may not, but their friends might... https://www.washingtonpost.com/c281c2f4-e3eb-11e2-a11e-c2ea8...

re-read the OP comment about "kidnapping", the "well-known cases" OP referred to weren't as "well-known" as he originally thought, because he couldn't find even one instance of it happening.

How do they kidnap people from a plane crossing from south America to Europe via the Atlantic? Board the plane in-flight?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com