• ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I'm saying they took two factual things and then reasoned themselves to believe those things are connected. Which is exactly what you're doing here.

    Okay, yes. And it is reasonable. Do you have any other explanation for what happened?

    Edit: lol lmao, this is your explanation

    Without any further information I'd say they're just discussing ideas (in this case who should be in the government) to present to Yatseniuk with the goal of making sure Russia doesn't sabotage the movement. Nothing about it implies planning a coup.

    That's just straight up counterfactual to what they actually say lmao

    End edit

    You've taken two factual things and then assumed based on your beliefs that they must be connected. There's no evidence of them actually plotting a coup. I even gave you an alternative that very much suits what the leaked discussion was about.

    They're literally talking about who should be in and out of government and moving to make it happen.

    I'm not here to do your work lazyass. You said there are more, find your own proof and be more specific. Wikipedia dumps are not proof.

    You're literally the one being lazy.

    I'm done, you're more than entitled to your willfully ignorant, arrogant bullshit.