La Russophobe has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 6 seconds. If not, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Monday, January 21, 2008

EDITORIAL: Dear Secretary Rice


Dear Secretary Rice

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
U.S. State Department
Washington, DC

Dear Secretary Rice,

We read that your second-in-command R. Nicholas Burns has tendered his resignation, and that you are thinking of replacing him with our Ambassador to Russia, William J. Burns (no relation). If this indeed comes to pass, you will need a new chief diplomat in Moscow. In that case, we have three words (and a Roman numeral) for you to consider:

John Sidney McCain III

Now, with any luck, Senator McCain will be the Republican nominee for President of the United States within the next few months (he's now won major primary contests in New Hampshire and South Carolina), and will go on to win the White House next November, and hence will unavailable to accept your nomination to be America's next Ambassador to Russia. He'll then be making radical changes in our Russia policy, and he himself will name our new ambassador to carry out that policy. But if he's not, and isn't chosen as the nominee's running mate, then he should be our next representative to the dictatorship of Vladimir Putin for the duration of the Bush presidency, hopefully to continue in that role thereafter.

Frankly, we think that Ambassador Burns should have been replaced long ago, for the simple reason that although we follow Russian politics religiously we almost never even hear his name being mentioned. His profile is so low you'd need a magnifying glass to see it, and he ought to be decrying the rise of dictatorship in Russia from every rooftop he can find.

Recent events indicate that an unmistakably strong signal must be sent to the people of Russia that their government is provoking the world's most powerful country and that if they don't take matters into their own hands, they will suffer dire consequences. As we report below, a sensational new book alleges that a major U.N. weapons inspector is a Russian spy. Russia is funneling weapons to our arch enemies in Venezuela and Iran, as well as supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. It is making outrageous gestures of imperialism both north (towards the Arctic sea floor) and south (towards former slave states like Ukraine and Georgia). And worst of all it is reimposing the vile Soviet tactics of repression against freedom and democracy in Russia itself, all while seeking to weaponize its vast energy resources to be used against us no differently than the USSR used its nuclear weapons.

The people of Ukraine, and their leaders, clearly understand their peril, and for that reason, as we also report below, have just implored NATO for admission; this request must be speedily granted, and the same goes for Georgia. We have just witnessed relentless efforts by Russia to unseat pro-West, popularly elected governments in favor of Russian puppets in both countries, and the only way Russia's determined efforts in this regard can be interrupted by is by bringing them into the NATO fold. If you allow these nations to fall back behind the new Iron Curtain as Hungary and Czechoslovakia did in the past, the judgment of history will fall upon you without mercy.

Actually, all things considered, we think it would be advisable for the U.S. to break diplomatic relations with Russia and treat the country the way China treats Taiwan. Russia is rapidly rehabilitating the USSR, and its people are proving that they never actually thought it was so bad after all. A strong message has to be sent that this position is intolerable to the United States, and no message could be stronger than to shut down our embassy and withdraw our diplomatic staff except for actual military confrontation. Given the way Russia's media and political environments have been choked off and stifled by the Kremlin, only the boldest of moves like this will ever actually come to the attention of Russia's increasingly benighted population.

However, we doubt you have the guts for such a move, no matter how necessary it obviously is.

So the next best thing to do is send in Senator McCain -- or, if he's unavailable, then the woman or man most like him that will accept the position. We'd suggest that the best way of identifying such a person would be to ask Senator McCain himself. He can probably offer many good choices, and we wouldn't presume to second-guess him.

You see, Ms. Rice, Senator McCain understands Russia. He understands dictatorship. Because he's seen it up close, having fallen into its clutches while risking his life to protect our country. So Senator McCain has called for the United States to take vigorous action to stand up to tyranny in Russia, suggesting that the first action we take should be to demand Russia's removal from the G-7 group of Western democracies, which now technically has eight members, if Russia's quasi-member status is counted. We have enough respect for Senator McCain to give him the benefit of the doubt on this; if he thinks we should try that move (and a coordinated set of other steps) before breaking relations, we can accept that.

As General Douglas MacArthur once said: "The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace -- for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war." Senator McCain, a former soldier, does not call for confrontation lightly, but only when our nation has no other alternative. He has said that, unlike our current president, when he looks in the eyes of Vladimir Putin he sees not his soul but three letters: K-G-B. Nobody who has ever been victimized by that entity can see anything else. President Bush, having lived a rather isolated and protected existence, simply has no idea what it means to be powerless before such an organization, nor seemingly does he understand that Putin has spent his entire life learning how to lie and deceive such as Mr. Bush.

As we've said on this blog many times before, you and your president are in serious jeopardy of leaving behind you a legacy of failure where Russia policy is concerned. To be sure, the deck was stacked badly against you by the gross incompetence, bordering on treason, of Bill Clinton which preceded you. Clinton was caught (and not for the first time) with his pants down when Boris Yeltsin tapped proud KGB spy Putin as his successor, and did nothing to oppose Putin's rise to power. But nobody in the world, including Bill Clinton, forced your boss Dubya Bush to make his obscene remark about looking in Putin's eyes and seeing a trustworthy soul. Maybe you had nothing to do with that remark, or even opposed it, but that doesn't change the fact that if you don't take immediate steps that insipid statement will haunt you for the rest of your life.

Very truly yours,

La Russophobe


Anonymous said...

John McCain? What brand of vodka are you people imbibbing in? Please look up "McCain-Feingold" and see what glorious things this man did for campaign-finance-reform. The first step to infringement upon free speach. Secondly, he does little for border security. If anything; his ideas would create a porous border at best. Just because he saw K-G-B drift across Putin's irises doesn't mean this man would do diddly-squat to promote "democracy" anywhere on the globe, much less Russia. Lastly, having observed him in previous campaigns, etc...the man has too hot of a temper to be president, and too big of an ego to play second-fiddle to anyone else. (Both attributes could be easily taken advantage of by the likes of Putin and co.) Voting and promoting a candidate on one issue is niave at best, suicidal at most. MHO.

Anonymous said...

Since Mr. McCain was downed over Vietnam while "bombing it into the Stone Age" and burning Vietnamese women and children alive with napalm, he ought to be grateful to the Vietnamese just for sparing his life.

La Russophobe said...


Notably, you fail to name one single rival candidate who you feel would do more to stand up to Russia than Mr. McCain. That pretty much proves we're right, as we see it.


So, Russians should be ashamed for the violence the inflicted upon Germany?

Anonymous said...

Dear Ma'am,

Please inform me: when and how did Vietnam commit an unprovoked act of aggression against the USA, moreover the one of the same scale as the one Germany committed against the USSR on 22.06.1941

Anonymous said...

Miss Condoleeza will not be in office much longer, so she should start to focus on the important things in life, like finding a man, settling down and having some kids.

Recently US presidential hopeful John-john McCain made the following recent remark: "When I look into the eyes of President Putin the only thing I will see is three thing, a "K", a "G" and a "B."

Of course this is just a silly retort to Wrong-Way Dubya's remarks (I think it was some a few years ago now), that he looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul (and concluded that Putin was a man the US could do business with.

Of course McCain's theatrics are designed to capture the support of the anti-Russian crowd (just one of a large number of right-wing wacko groups where McCain's support has been lagging). For a US politician such words carry little risk, as there is not much of a "pro-Russia" lobby in the US. Even Hillary Clinton has been saying how "tough" she'll be on Putin too Russia lately too. Too bad Mr. Putin will be long gone from office and faded back into the woodwork of Russian politics by the time either one of them could be elected.

It looks like the geriatric senator from Arizona has been trying to shore up his support with the most reactionary and backwards elements in the Republican Party. Old John-john has has finally lost his other marble. He's also been making remarks that he is against handgun control, abortion, etc., and he is for School Prayer and so forth.

Here's a recent Murdoch News photo of "Gonzo" McCain on the handgun issue:

The last thing the US needs to have in office after 8 long years of Wrong-way at the helm is yet another loose cannon (and an even worse one by all accounts).

McCain is of course infamous for his horrible temper and his explosions of rage. Recently McCain was asked in an interview about polls that suggested voters thought he was too old to be president: Photo-1 Photo-2


Anonymous said...

Anonymous-ONE wrote: “…[McCain] has too hot of a temper to be president, and too big of an ego to play second-fiddle to anyone else. (Both attributes could be easily taken advantage of by the likes of Putin and co.) Voting and promoting a candidate on one issue is naive at best, suicidal at most…”

Of course hot-heads like McCain are easily manipulated due to their uncontrollable anger problem. The well-trained KGB men in the Kremlin look for any human failing and they are expert at taking advantage of it.

Whether you love Bush or hate him, he is a smooth operator and knows how to keep his passions and anger in check. Bush is man of rigid self-discipline. Until recently Bush ran several miles every day. There is the story of Bush’s alcoholism, which George and Laura like to tell... One day Laura Bush had enough of her husbands raging alcoholism, and she confronted George; Laura said: “George, it’s Jimmy Beam or me! One of us has got to go!” and George Bush stopped drinking cold, just like that, at that very moment… Never went back to the bottle (or so the story goes…) I only tell that story to illustrate that Bush has a lot of self-discipline and self-control (as do all KGB men such as the perfectly-in-shape Vlad Putin).

So, you put a hot-head and a walking time bomb like John McCain in office, just because he impressed you with some nasty words against Putin or Russia… But in the long-run Russia will have McCain for breakfast, because he has no self-control; he cannot control his temper and emotions, and that opens him up to being easily exploited and manipulated by others.

Anger management problem is a human frailty, just like Clinton's weakness for the ladies, or someone's $200 a day heroin habit.


La Russophobe said...

Silly? Oh my, MISHA, we thinks you dost protest TOO much.

Nervous are you, little boy?

Good. You should be.

Anonymous said...

"So, Russians should be ashamed for the violence the inflicted upon Germany?"

Germany was an pure aggressor against Russia. So violence upon Germany was protective measure.

And why do you always forget about sufferings of Russians? Russia lost 27 millions in the war, 9.5 among them were army men, other 17.5 millions were civilians.

And did Vietnam ever attack USA?

Anonymous said...

La Russophobe; usually I agree with most (not all) you write. But on the McCain issue, I must stand my ground. As for another not Ron Paul!!! The candidate I would like to see is a boring, lackluster ol' trooper who doesn't even know what the word pizzazz means: Fred Thompson. Does he have a snowball's chance is hell? I don't know; but looking at his record and rhetoric the man would be a win-win for both you(Russophobe) and the likes of lil' ol' me.

What to do if some libral in conservative clothing wins? Something that can't be done in Russia: make my voice and opinions heard.

Anonymous said...

Misha; your comment about Miss Rice was a wee bit sexist. Silly man, don't you know her heart is set on being football commissioner. Actually, I would have loved it if SHE would have thrown her hat into the presidential ring; Russian studies was her forte.

I also must disagree with your term anti-Russian crowd. Just because there are those of us on the OUTSIDE looking in; who see the truth of what is occurring in Russia and are want to call attention to it, does not make us anti-Russian. On the contrary, it is because of a profound sense of "friendship" and understanding of the human spirit with its desire to be free, that many of us out here are willing to point out and calling a warning to the antics occurring in the Kremlin power structure.

A friend is one willing to risk it all by telling you you are heading down a dangerous path; an enemy smiles and waves you on your way.

Anonymous said...

Russia is not afraid of Bush or John-John McCain. If the Americans could defeat Russia don't you think they would have done it by now? They have not failed to destroy Russia for a lack of trying, but because such a task is simply beyond the limits of their fast-declining global power, unless they use nuclear weapons; and if they do then Russia will respond in kind, killing 98 percent of the US population in the process.

As far as the US Secretary of State Miss Condoleeza is concerned, one of Russia's leaders recently expressed his opinion of what Miss Condoleeza needs in an exclusive interview with Pravda.Ru. Here is the INTERVIEW

Anonymous said...

hey LR, why do you keep censoring my posts?
just a little bit neo-soviet, eh?

akarlin said...

"Actually, all things considered, we think it would be advisable for the U.S. to break diplomatic relations with Russia and treat the country the way China treats Taiwan."

And the very next day Russians will wake up, smell the coffee, overthrow brutal totalitarian regime and beg to be allowed to talk to the US (or at least lick McCain's hand)...

Or maybe not.

Anonymous said...

stalker, you are funny! We, Russians , are sooooo scared of the old phycho McCain rattling his loose dentures! La Russophobe is doing us a favor, actually! Usually we bitch about our leaders. It's our inalienable right, after all. But when somebody openly declares that he/she hates us and would do anything to destroy us, we get behind our banners!
Dear anonymous-one, the name of this blog is La Russophobe, not La Russophile, It means hatred. And if you are looking toward Russia through such dirty peephole as this one, naturally you see dirt.