And you of course don't find promoting coups to overthrow the democratically elected government of you country to be a threat to family and kids, right? That all okay. Cool.
Thanks for supporting my point. Additionally, 'coup' in my view has the connotations of a regime overthrow by a militant minority, which does not seem to have been the case.
i want to add again, this wasn't a coup attempt. You dilute those words and they become meaningless. It hurts the people who have lived through and suffered from real coups.
So.. what's your argument here? That the coup didn't happen? That it wasn't backed by the US and Britain? That is was good actually?
this is the general strategy of people who don't want to face up to factual terrible things that contradict their ideology. They speak in generalities to avoid confronting any inconvenient truths.
My problem is with the description of that action as a "coup". I'm not defending those people. I'm not informed well enough to do that. But a coup? I don't think so.
Coups generally rely on military support, or some sort of established basis for taking and holding political power. This was not a coup. Or it was the shittest one ever.
reply