I'm sticking to theme here, if you feel a highly suspicious coup justifies invading a country then you're definitely not working at a level where you're drawing the right lessons from WWII. How did you make the leap from that to supporting an invasion?

There's a huge difference between wanting the Russian invasion to succeed and judging that the US's opposing it is not worth the cost (in Ukrainian lives and US money) or the risks (of the Kremlin doing something desperate or vengeful if the invasion turns ugly on them, like helping the Iranians and North Koreans obtain ICBMs capable of hitting US cities).

Note the phrase I quoted.

I’m not saying this because they argue against intervention. I say this because they’re parroting the exact nonsense talking points that Russia uses to justify the invasion.

Just because the Russian leadership says it does not automatically make it false.

I'm saddened that I need to explain that to anybody.

Just because I think it’s a load of horseshit doesn’t mean I reached that conclusion solely on the basis of believing the opposite of what Russia says.

Sure, but you are dismissing someone just because he noticed and spoke about one of the things that spokespersons for the Russian regime noticed and spoke about.