@notfoundonx@timurkuran Yes, they normally need permission. But it has happened multiple times, so saying it doesn’t happen isn’t true. It’s been allowed because it wasn’t against the law, which is probably why the law is being proposed.
@Ilias_Soledad@timurkuran I’ve personally heard it broadcast at Rådhuspladsen, one of Copenhagen’s biggest public squares, as well as at other large public gatherings.
@notfoundonx@timurkuran It’s not the mosques that are the issue. In my experience, they’re generally not a problem. However, I’ve personally heard it broadcast at Rådhuspladsen, one of Copenhagen’s biggest public squares, and at other large public gatherings using loudspeakers.
@paulrmc@janrosenow That’s not correct. Denmark’s per capita emissions are only slightly higher than France. France is lower mainly because of nuclear. Denmark also has a colder climate and higher heating demand.
@NXT4EU This isn’t new. Denmark has had these markings for a long time. Framing it as something they just introduced makes it sound like a political statement and unnecessarily escalates things. Pretty misleading.
@nikitabier Please make it so that accounts that get community noted also get their reach and earnings reduced. There is far too much stupid misinformation on this platform. If you are serious about being a reputable news source, this should have been implemented long ago.
@KerryMac62657 @MyLordBebo Everyone is aware of the threat. The point of the comparison was that Trumps reaction seems disproportionate when you look at the situation. Russia regularly operates submarines and aircraft close to the US without the same level of public statements or political pressure.
@KerryMac62657 @MyLordBebo We also don’t place troops in the US without permission. Being in the same hemisphere is not the same as being in someone’s country. By that logic, Russian submarines and aircraft operate closer to the US every day without it being called aggression. Context and intent matter.
@KerryMac62657 @MyLordBebo They don’t need to ask the US for permission when it is not their territory. The number of troops was tiny on purpose and in no way a military threat to the US. It was clearly symbolic and meant to show support for Denmark. Seeing that as aggression doesn’t really make sense.
@KerryMac62657 @MyLordBebo They were never deployed to fight the US? The purpose was to support Denmark and show that Arctic defense is taken seriously. The US was even invited to take part in the exercises.
@amongiello@StayClassy1024@Rainmaker1973 Yes, it was wrong and shouldn’t have been done. It was meant to stop cases where children were being made pregnant by family members. The US has forcibly sterilized Native Americans to control their population, so moral authority is a bit selective here.
@major_crawley@Microinteracti1 I wouldn’t give up free healthcare for that money. But if you didn’t grow up with a welfare system, I get why the cash would seem tempting. A lot of people only really see the value of it when they actually need it.
@HerstedJ@N_Granell@SteffenFrolund Det er en forsimplet og nedladende påstand. Mange grønlændere og danskere har et godt forhold til hinanden. Derudover får Danmark tilbage i form af strategisk indflydelse i Arktis, sikkerhedspolitisk betydning og adgang til naturressourcer. Regnestykket er mere kompliceret.
@modestpropos4l@MarttinChriste1@rcarnold1@MarioNawfal If you really think Denmark would go to war with the US, that’s unbelievably stupid. Denmark knows it would lose before it even started. This is about showing resolve when pressured. And bringing up Russia is weird since Denmark is the biggest supporter of Ukraine relative to GDP