"We're not going to let anyone get away with interfering with our fatherland, you despicable lackey, president of Panama,” said Maduro.

that's right. panama.

remember when the leader of venezuela waved around chomsky and deconstructed american foreign policy in lengthy state addresses?

no more of that nonsense. the new leader of venezuela has taught us who the real threat to global stability is: panama.

despicable, indeed.

(in other news, my ass is informing me that maduro has entered into an agreement with the state department that sees him maintain power as an american-backed fascist dictator in return for promising not to wave around chomsky and deconstruct american foreign policy.)

that's just how the world works, kids.

also, word has it that david lee roth is now indefinitely banned from venezuela for his anti-revolutionary art.

^ that is the only possible excuse for ever, ever, ever posting van halen anywhere.

"Panama only hopes that this brother nation finds peace and strengthens its democracy," - the "astonished" president of panama

unless....

venezuela couldn't possibly be thinking of invading panama could it?

that would wreak some havoc.

a man, a plan...one of those funny hats?

-------------

geez, he could have at least blamed the california girls.

that's a step down in quality of nemesis, nicolas. hugo got to fight the americans. you're getting picked on by panama? what did you get in return for toning down on the anti-americanism?

next week, it'll be cuba.

ps: i always knew david lee roth was a mason.

http://rt.com/news/venezuela-breaks-relations-panama-026/

maduro had sell out on his forehead from day one.

unfortunately, this could get ugly.

uglier than this, even.

i know, that's an unwholesome thought. but i kind of assumed that when maduro became dictator it would be isolationist. dictators that play nice with the americans are always bad news.

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2008/10/22/russia_might_invade_ukraine_if_obama_wins_palin_warns

well, what did you want them to do?

invite the us marines into the crimean base?

http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140305/188114816/Russia-Spent-11Bln-on-Propping-Ruble-Amid-Conflict-Fears.html

ok, chill out.

world war three didn't start a few weeks ago. world war three started some time in the 90s. it's just easier if you don't know about it.

vladimir putin is a known known, and the truth is that he's a pansy. maybe that's what the macho bullshit exterior is about.

or, at least that's what the americans are counting on, in their attempt to distract him. the goal is syria, and then iran. putin's become an annoyance. maybe he wouldn't be so annoying if he had some problems in his own backyard to worry about.

chechens are notoriously untrustworthy. you gotta bribe 'em over and over. and, in the end, they don't actually give a fuck. but, missile bases in ukraine is enough to get putin to shit in his pants.

you can hear bits of this policy of asserting hegemony with a pair of iron balls in the western media. kerry called russia weak. that's hyperbolic, but he's right. the americans wouldn't be as aggressive, otherwise.

...and they wouldn't be as aggressive if russia was governed by somebody who isn't a pansy.

so, stop worrying about a war. it's not going to happen. putin will give the west what it wants, because he doesn't have the stomach to give the orders.

that's the sick, twisted truth. the americans will squeeze every last drop out. slowly. c'mon, now vlad - they've got you pinned. say uncle.

checkmate in five.

well, he's right, and of course i agree with him

i've been following rt with the ukrainian issue due to their proximity, but i've previously preferred ria novosti when i've followed russian media at all. the difference is actually substantial. i mean, if i want to know russia's response to nato expansion or developments about the missile shield, i read russian media. that makes sense. it follows that russian media is important in getting a full picture.

so, i do suggest reading russian media. but i don't read - and don't suggest reading - rt uncritically. as i don't suggest reading cnn or al jazeera uncritically. there's huge biases in all these sources. reading them should come with that caveat.

obviously.

with the issue in ukraine? i find their narrative more plausible. it's not perfect. there's a lot of propaganda to break through. i don't think any existing or future russian action is going to be to "protect russian citizens". that's the propaganda. they have strategic aims they will follow. but reading it helps understand what those aims are. and they're relevant in getting what's happening.

but the situation there is outlandish, and the russians are right to freak out about it. it's hard to talk about russia obeying agreements when they're dealing with the armed gunmen storming parliaments. they have a strategic base to protect, and if they're just going to show up with goons and hang out then i have a hard time criticizing them for it. they start killing people, that's a different story.

further, the russians have claimed they have no intent of annexing crimea. i don't see any reason not to believe them. we'll have to see how credible they are in the long run. for now, it seems like a reasonable policy - regardless of the international law that no country in the world pays more than lip service to.

i'm an anarchist...

independent media is useful for analysis, but in the end it's a secondary source. state media - whatever it's flaws - is a primary source. that's a very key difference to observe. so, it's an important tool in the arsenal.

that's all quite secondary to what he's saying here, which is that shit is complex and i again agree is largely correct.

something that's forgotten is that ukrainian media is also state-owned. so, there's not really any good sources here.

if you think the people that just took over in kiev are into free and fair media, you've had some wool pulled over your eyes...

you have to understand that if russia were to lose it's crimean port that would be a shattering shift in global power. that has been the prime russian objective for centuries. it's a huge naval facility. like, if you had the russian military sit down and list the five most strategic areas in the world for them, the crimea would be near the top of the list.

and it's not like the americans don't know that.

so, i'm willing to bend a little. that's something they can't lose. i feel that suggesting otherwise would be very much cheerleading for a pro-nato position.

despite the mostly empty rhetoric about rights and laws.

i'm going to rant a little in a new post...

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2008/10/22/russia_might_invade_ukraine_if_obama_wins_palin_warns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiKF8JN1qmk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkC4Z67QuC0

it actually seems to me as though the west is best on escalating the situation at any cost.

regardless, here's kerry's meaningless words.

yup. it's spring.

*groan*

march, smarch.

lousy smarch weather.

i saw the sun hit at that special spring angle this morning, though! looks like it's at least going to be habitable starting tomorrow.

which means i should expect that gnawing stomach ache in the next few days.