Quote (Goomshill @ May 8 2024 07:25pm)
There's a difference between "The CIA co-opted the coup and took over afterwards" and "The CIA organized the coup in the first place". I'm not sure its anything but an academic difference, because the culpability and power grab is the same whether its opportunistic or by design.
It certainly doesn't change the geopolitical chessboard
We know from the CIA's history that they've clearly organized these kinds of color revolutions as artificial movements to overthrow governments around the world, yet they've also covered their tracks for contemporary reports. Which puts us in one of those known-unknown situations, the absence of evidence doesn't move the needle one way or the other.
If the absence of evidence doesn't move the needle that is entirely your perogative.
I accept your version of events as what you believe happened, even if I find your explanation entirely gymnastic and a little bit like working back from an outcome rather than looking at the evidence and then coming to a conclusion.
A little bit like djunior claiming NATO expansion was the cause of Putins invasion or that John Mccain doing a speech 4 weeks after the Maidan started was the cause for the Maidan
That one cracks me up.
However I obviously disagree.
As its topical I'll share a quote from one of the greatest minds my country has ever produced and although I should take no credit for his wisdom I am proud that the Scottish enlightenment brought so much value to the world of science and beyond.
"
A wise man apportions his beliefs to the evidence. The sweetest and most inoffensive path of life leads through the avenues
of science and learning; and whoever can either remove any obstructions in this way, or open up any new prospect, ought so far to be esteemed a benefactor to mankind." -
David HumeThis post was edited by Prox1m1ty on May 9 2024 01:03pm