idarad - I’m suggesting nothing of the sort, because the Republicans operate under the US Constitution, whereas the President of Honduras operates under the Honduran Constitution.  Under that Constitution it appears that senior public officials are forbidden from advocating for an extension of the President’s term, which is apparently what Zelaya was trying to do.  Now I think such a condition has no place in a constitution, but then I’ve never lived under, and in fear of, a dictatorship.

So the Supreme Court decided that Zelaya should be removed, which the military did.  That might be based on faulty legal reasoning within the Supreme Court, of course, but they’re doing the thing they’re supposed to do, so it can’t be a coup.  Interestingly, it appears that by removing Zelaya *from the country* somebody (the military?) has acted unconstitutionally, but that’s a separate issue.

It was my understanding that this wasn’t a coup - the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the military to remove the President because of his unconstitutional attempts to extend his term.  The correct operation of a legal system can’t be considered a coup, can it?