• GoodEye8@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re literally proving my point. You’ve added nothing to factually prove the coup, you’re adding assumptions to make the fact fit the narrative. Also Yats is not the leader of the Fatherland party, he used to be there but moved to People’s front in 2014.

    • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re literally proving my point. You’ve added nothing to factually prove the coup

      I dont need to add more stuff. What they said makes it obvious they’re talking about a soft or hard coup. You’re being shown a red balloon and asking for more proof it’s a red balloon.

      What would you accept as proof, if not the senior US officials there talking about who should be in government and about moving to make it happen?

      Also Yats is not the leader of the Fatherland party, he used to be there but moved to People’s front in 2014.

      Oh, cool, the people’s front! Let’s learn more about them:

      The Ukrainian People’s Party (Ukrainian: Українська Народна Партія; Ukrains’ka Narodna Partiya) is a political party in Ukraine, registered on Old Year’s Day 1999 as the Ukrainian National Movement

      Oh. Cool. A nationalist pseudo populist organization. Where have I seen those before?

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Russian politicians were also talking how Russia should nuke Nevada test site, so I guess Russia has nuked America because the only thing required to make it true is someone talking about it.

        The Ukrainian People’s Party (Ukrainian: Українська Народна Партія; Ukrains’ka Narodna Partiya) is a political party in Ukraine, registered on Old Year’s Day 1999 as the Ukrainian National Movement

        For fuck sake, at the very least search for the right thing. not this, but this.

        • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Russian politicians were also talking how Russia should nuke Nevada test site, so I guess Russia has nuked America because the only thing required to make it true is someone talking about it.

          Did a nuke go off at the Nevada test site in a way that wasn’t connected to US nuclear testing? If so, it would be reasonable to assume the Russians who talked about doing it did it if it furthered their geopolitical objectives.

          For fuck sake, at the very least search for the right thing. not this, but this.

          Oh, sorry. But still, theyre described as a conservative nationalist party and split from the “Fatherland” party. Also the leader of Azov Battalion was on their military council. Hrmm.

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            it would be reasonable to assume the Russians who talked about doing it did it if it furthered their geopolitical objectives.

            Now you’re word for word proving what I originally claimed. If something happened and another factual event happened, that may or may not be related, and you believe they’re related then it’s okay to make the assumption that asserts your belief.

            But still, theyre described as a conservative nationalist party and split from the “Fatherland” party.

            Conservative doesn’t mean neonazi and maybe they split to be less radical?

            Also the leader of Azov Battalion was on their military council. Hrmm.

            I’m tired of constantly correcting you so I’m just going say wrong

            • Now you’re word for word proving what I originally claimed. If something happened and another factual event happened, that may or may not be related, and you believe they’re related then it’s okay to make the assumption that asserts your belief.

              Yes, it is extremely reasonable.

              If John Smith talked about killing Jake Jones and was recorded, and then Jake Jones showed up killed as John Smith described he would be, then it would be reasonable to assume that John Smith killed Jake Jones. Jake Jones’ head could have just done that spontaneously, but it is unlikely.

              Do you have an alternate explanation for them saying “we’re going to install the people we want and keep out the people we dont” and then that happening?

              Conservative doesn’t mean neonazi and maybe they split to be less radical?

              Okay but there are neonazis in the Wikipedia article you linked about them

              Begin article quote

              The military council is a special body of People’s Front. It develops proposals for strengthening of the defence system of Ukraine.

              The council was created on 10 September 2014 together with the political and coordinating councils of the party. It was formed by the party congress which also approved the council’s composition. It included the Chief of Staff of the party and Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Oleksandr Turchynov, Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, coordinator of the “Information Resistance” blog, Lt. Col. Dmytro Tymchuk, former acting Head of the Presidential Administration and co-founder of the revived National Guard Serhiy Pashynskiy and former secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine, Euromaidan commandant and organizer of the Maidan self-defense units Andriy Parubiy.

              The council is made up of leading commanders of the territorial defense battalions: Andriy Biletsky, commander of the Azov Battalion, Yuriy Bereza, commander of the Dnipro Battalion, Kostyantyn Mateichenko, commander of the Artemivsk battalion, Roman Pytski, commander of the Chernihiv battalion, Andriy Teteruk, commander of the Myrotvorets battalion, Yevhen Deydey, commander of the Kyiv-1 battalion, Mykola Shvalya, commander of the Zoloti Vorota battalion, Ihor Lapin, company commander of the Aidar Battalion Serhiy Sydoryn, vice-battalion commander of the National Guard and Mykhailo Havryluk, a soldier of the Kyivska Rus battalion.

              End article quote

              I’m tired of constantly correcting you so I’m just going say wrong

              Begin article quote

              The council is made up of leading commanders of the territorial defense battalions: Andriy Biletsky, commander of the Azov Battalion, Yuriy Bereza, commander of the Dnipro Battalion, Kostyantyn Mateichenko, commander of the Artemivsk battalion, Roman Pytski, commander of the Chernihiv battalion, Andriy Teteruk, commander of the Myrotvorets battalion, Yevhen Deydey, commander of the Kyiv-1 battalion, Mykola Shvalya, commander of the Zoloti Vorota battalion, Ihor Lapin, company commander of the Aidar Battalion Serhiy Sydoryn, vice-battalion commander of the National Guard and Mykhailo Havryluk, a soldier of the Kyivska Rus battalion.

              • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, it is extremely reasonable.

                If John Smith talked about killing Jake Jones and was recorded, and then Jake Jones showed up killed as John Smith described he would be, then it would be reasonable to assume that John Smith killed Jake Jones. Jake Jones’ head could have just done that spontaneously, but it is unlikely.

                It’s how 4chan and Reddit decided Sunil Tripathi was the Boston marathon bomber. A bombing happened, someone knew Sunil had gone missing, images kinda looked similar, people wanted to find a connection so they made whatever connection they could find. He wasn’t the bomber but people still started a witchhunt based on assumptions they thought were reasonable. So no, I don’t think blindly taking assumptions as factuals is extremely reasonable.

                Do you have an alternate explanation for them saying “we’re going to install the people we want and keep out the people we dont” and then that happening?

                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.

                Okay but there are neonazis in the Wikipedia article you linked about them

                I’m going to need more specifics than an information dump. Outside of the Azov being in the military council (which I admit was my mistake for not noticing, and I’ll get to why that’s not proof) and Andriy Parubiy (who I wouldn’t consider a Nazi because he been a target of that kind of disinformation campaign by pro-russian media) nobody else catches my eye.

                As for the addition of Azov in that list. The council is not made up of territorial defense battalions, it’s made up of leaders of volunteer battalions. Azov was at that moment a volunteer battalion which is why they were included, along with the other leaders of the volunteer battalions. He wasn’t picked because he was neo-nazi, he was picked because he was leading one of the biggest volunteer battalions. The idea that the government is a neo-nazi government because the biggest political party in that government created a special body and that special body has one known neo-nazi is just bewildering. Look at how many hoops you have to jump through just to have some connection between neo-nazis and the 2014 Ukrainian parliament, and then tell me that is reasonable.

                • It’s how 4chan and Reddit decided Sunil Tripathi was the Boston marathon bomber. A bombing happened, someone knew Sunil had gone missing, images kinda looked similar, people wanted to find a connection so they made whatever connection they could find. He wasn’t the bomber but people still started a witchhunt based on assumptions they thought were reasonable. So no, I don’t think blindly taking assumptions as factuals is extremely reasonable.

                  Okay, are you saying that this is a case of mistaken identity? I dont get what you’re trying to claim.

                  I treat the assumption as fact within my internal worldview because it is the only explanation I can think of for what happened and it has strong supporting evidence. We have records of them plotting, so they probably carried out their plot as it seems that what happened mirrored what their plot wanted.

                  Again, I would love an alternative explanation for what they said they wanted and were doing lining up with what happened.

                  As for the addition of Azov in that list. The council is not made up of territorial defense battalions, it’s made up of leaders of volunteer battalions. Azov was at that moment a volunteer battalion which is why they were included, along with the other leaders of the volunteer battalions. He wasn’t picked because he was neo-nazi, he was picked because he was leading one of the biggest volunteer battalions. The idea that the government is a neo-nazi government because the biggest political party in that government created a special body and that special body has one known neo-nazi is just bewildering. Look at how many hoops you have to jump through just to have some connection between neo-nazis and the 2014 Ukrainian parliament, and then tell me that is reasonable.

                  Wait, did you not go over the list and look at the political history of everyone involved? It’s much more than one nazi.

                  Do your research and then take a second attempt at replying.

                  • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Okay, are you saying that this is a case of mistaken identity? I dont get what you’re trying to claim.

                    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.

                    I treat the assumption as fact within my internal worldview because it is the only explanation I can think of for what happened and it has strong supporting evidence. We have records of them plotting, so they probably carried out their plot as it seems that what happened mirrored what their plot wanted.

                    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.

                    Wait, did you not go over the list and look at the political history of everyone involved? It’s much more than one nazi.

                    Do your research and then take a second attempt at replying.

                    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.