4 ms·
FYI, the account that you are replying to has a very long track record of pushing this talking point (and other crank opinions), so do not think that you are en
by SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
FYI, the account that you are replying to has a very long track record of pushing this talking point (and other crank opinions), so do not think that you are engaging in a good faith discussion with someone who can be convinced (1) - if they could be, it would have happened long ago. They're here to push that opinion into the public sphere.
That account was even banned from posting for a while (2), thankfully. Why it was allowed back, I do not know.
1)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33679821 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33679821
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32314627 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32314627
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32990026 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32990026
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32314574 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32314574
2)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32323579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32323579
- klqwant 4y agoThe word coup, which user "yucky" hasn't introduced in this conversation, is used informally and not in a literal sense. It does not mean that the U.S. installed a military junta. It means that U.S. officials interfered in the Maidan revolution and picked favorites. How much influence they had is questionable, but they were there. If you think that is a crank opinion, the BBC is a crank outlet.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago> The word coup, which user "yucky" hasn't introduced in this conversation That account has in fact introduced the word "coup" with reference to Ukraine, many times over in conversations. And you're right, it does carry with it the ugly, false and deceptive connotations of "installed a military junta against the wishes of the people". Not to imply that they always "introduce" it. In fact, if you say it, they probably pop up like Beetlejuice for the opportunity to launch into the shpiel again. You are again correct that this conversation appears to be one of those times.