Obama is a dirty monkey. Barack Obama - monkey or successful strategist

Against the backdrop of glorifications of Donald Trump, who is taking office today, January 20, the media are broadcasting the “sad” results of the 8-year rule of Barack Obama. He was defeated, someone cunningly outplayed him ... Let's evaluate the personality of the enemy and his team objectively, and not through the prism of propaganda designed for the level of "guys from our yard" (for them everything is simple - "Obama is a monkey" and "Obama is schmuck").

Have Barack Obama and his two-term administration failed or achieved success?

In the internal affairs of the United States, they did not allow the fall of the dollar and the economy, the unemployment rate was at a historic low, under them the process of reindustrialization of America began. Although the public debt has grown significantly. But Obama was most successful in foreign policy despite the crackling of stupid anti-State propaganda.

The global plan of the owners of the United States since 2008 is to set fire to Eurasia. And in parallel, to make America a kind of island of stability on earth, where splits, coups, upheavals, civil wars are blazing across the oceans. Under Obama, they successfully coped with the initial stage of chaos in Eurasia. First, in 2011, Libya was liquidated as a state. Moreover, by the hands of their allies / competitors in the European Union. It was Libya that generated the first large flows of migrants to Europe.

Under Obama, a force was created in Iraq that has become a major problem for Eurasia. Banned in the Russian Federation by the decision of the Supreme Court, ISIS is a force generated by the United States, although not completely controlled by them. ISIS has become a kind of ferment of fear and destruction not only in the Middle East, but also in the Old World. At the same time, the militants in no way threaten the United States as a state. Slippers, for all their fanaticism, have no air force, no navy, no missiles. Obama success? Doubtless. Under him, it was possible to blow up Syria from the inside, plunge it into the abyss of civil war, into the wild field of war of all against all. From the point of view of destabilizing the region, this is an undeniable achievement of Washington's geopolitics.

It was under Obama that a pro-Western coup was successfully carried out in Ukraine. And now Kyiv is split off from the Russian Federation, imbued with anti-Russian sentiments. And the formed DPR and LPR became a scarecrow and a laughing stock of the “Russian world”. The Ukrainian conflict has turned into a ticking time bomb. The creation of a genuine Novorossiya in the form of a union state or its recognition as part of the Russian Federation was unacceptable to the masters of the West. Obama successfully halted this process by shifting all steam to the Syrian direction.

But there are several more points with potential detonation and dire consequences. The first is Egypt, the second is Afghanistan and Pakistan. If Afpak explodes, then the wave will go to Central Asia with constant refugees, chaos and a threat to the Russian Federation. In addition, American diplomacy has been successful in rocking Turkey. There are all prerequisites for a real confrontation between the supporters of the secular path - the Kemalists and the ruling Islamists.

Let's go back to Syria. The role of Russia in Syria looks unconvincing, even the fight against ISIS as a pretext is no longer voiced. But the military campaign turns Sunni Muslims against us and devours very decent financial resources, which is doubly dangerous given the growing acute socio-economic crisis and the shortage of funds in the budget. "He left his house, went to fight, to give the land of the Sunnis to the Shiites." This ditty contains the whole meaning of our participation in the Syrian conflict. Naturally, we have all these Sunnis with Shiites to one place, but the Russian world in the Russia-Novorossia format has been missed.

Obama's team was also able to inflict significant economic blows on the Russian Federation. Not just budget revenues were undermined, but the entire sacred hydrocarbon base. Even a large-scale rearmament program is being disrupted. In 2011, defense spending was 2.7% of GDP, in 2016 it reached a record - 3.7%. But due to the fall of the economy in 2017, 3.3% of GDP is planned, and in 2019 it will be 2.8%. Those. military spending is declining even in comparison with the “peaceful” 2011.

So calling Obama a monkey is, to say the least, reckless. He achieved 80% of his goals. And Trump very logically picked up his baton. He plans to industrialize America while keeping his competitors down. Contrary to his campaign rhetoric, he is not going to lift the sanctions, and immediately began to pursue a policy similar to Reagan's policy towards Gorbachev. Want softening? Reduce your nuclear potential by several times, disarm. Trump is not a gentleman who inherited power, but a tough pragmatist who won the fight. And Obama's achievements will be used to strengthen the negotiating position, demanding more and more concessions from external players.

The masters of the United States have an unspoken shady strategy that is being consistently carried out. Do other countries, in particular Russia, have such a strategy? So it's not yet clear who the losing "monkey" is in this world.

Yesterday, Vladimir Putin submitted an appeal to the Federation Council to authorize the entry of Russian troops into Ukraine. 87 senators unanimously supported the president's initiative.

On the same day, an African American called Putin. In a nutshell, the content of the conversation was as follows:

Obama.

Vladimir, you must not enter the Ukraine. You act like an invader and a dictator, you will regret the consequences. You violate international law, your actions threaten the international isolation of Russia. Such issues cannot be resolved without the participation of the UN Security Council and the OSCE. You can’t… you can’t… you can’t… You must… you must… you must…

Putin.

Barak, I'll be brief: "Kosovo precedent."

(All photos by IZYNTYRNET)

On the evening of the same day, Reuters, citing the press service of the White House, reported: "US President Barack Obama has officially asked Congress for permission to carry out a military operation in Syria."

Repeat-r-r-yu-yu-yushka ...

Was Obama smart?

I guess not. Unlike Russia, the US has no legal basis for sending troops to Syria. And this will indeed be a “violation of international law…”, etc., etc. Military assistance to Ukraine announced by US Congressman Damon Wilson, It also violates international treaties.

Was Putin ready for this?

I guess so. Shameless juggling with international obligations is the favorite thing of American democracy. Until recently, modern US foreign policy has generally been carried out exclusively from a position of strength. The forces of unconditional and obviously superior enemy forces. This way of conducting politics for many years cannot but weaken the tactical and analytical abilities of its bearer. And when there is a collision with a serious opponent who cannot simply be threatened, and if he is not afraid, simply bombed, then there comes a “break in the pattern”, paralysis of the will and inability to take alternative actions. This is exactly what we are seeing today in the situation in Ukraine.

Putin, on the other hand, is characterized by cold calculation, a deep analysis of the situation, and, perhaps, the main thing that his counterpart lacks is endurance.

Among those who are engaged in martial arts, there is such a term: “victim”. So ironically they call a person who has impressive dimensions, powerful muscles, but does not own the tactical and technical skills of hand-to-hand combat. As a rule, the self-confidence of such people in the very first seconds of sparring suffers a humiliating defeat from a obviously weaker physically, but trained fighter.

And Putin, unlike Obama, is engaged in martial arts. And he knows the term well...

Long before the African-American tantrums over Syria, which went as far as direct personal insults to Putin by Obama at the summit G8 in St. Petersburg, Russia began a systematic renewal and build-up of a group of warships in the Mediterranean.

Back in the fall of 2013, the grouping of Russian warships, carrying out a permanent presence in the Mediterranean Sea, both in terms of numbers and combat power exceeded (!) Similar indicators of NATO forces in the region:

At the moment, the strengthening of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation continues - as recently as yesterday two large anti-submarine ships entered the bay of Sevastopol Baltic Fleet of the Russian Federation "Kaliningrad" and "Minsk". The entry of the ships was carried out without the permission of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine.

Since about mid-January this year, the Syrian port of Tartus, where the Russian naval base is located, has been systematically restricted for hours by unauthorized persons. As a rule, closed mode is performed at night. This is an undoubted sign of the delivery of secret cargo.

According to the agency Reuters : "Dozens of AN-124 aircraft deliver armored vehicles, tracking equipment, radars, electronic warfare systems, helicopter parts, as well as various weapons, including guided aerial bombs."

From anonymous sources: “Russian advisers and intelligence experts operate surveillance drones around the clock to help the Syrian army track the positions of the rebels, analyze their capabilities and launch accurate artillery and air strikes against them.”

In a recent article (_Asymmetric response or against whom the Russian army is "learning"), we considered the ongoing large-scale exercises of the Russian troops at the moment. Among the stated goals of the exercises are: “Testing actions for relocating to operational airfields of the 1st Air Force and Air Defense Command, including with refueling in the air”, as well as: “ Bombing practice at unfamiliar ranges". Is this about Ukraine? I PLEASE…

(In the photo: a drawing of a tactical episode on the landing of an amphibious assault as part of the joint strategic exercises "West-2013". Photo from the website of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation)

Let's not forget that on the example of Crimea, Russia demonstrates not only the will, but ability to vigorously defend their interests. Among other things, a completely new Russian political technology has been revealed to the world that can effectively resist Sharp's technology, thanks to which, "without any interference from outside," local self-defense forces show miracles of mobilization, training and technical equipment, overnight turning from "ordinary workers, farmers and military men into retired" into mobile and highly effective military units of "polite people".

“Why do we need Syria?”, you ask. Another thing is Ukraine - a fraternal people and all that ...

The fact is that "protection of the interests of Russian citizens" by Russia, as well as "defense of democracy" by the United States, is just a political pretext for participating in the events.

The true reasons lie in the geopolitical plane. Since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has been systematically losing its positions in the world. Africa, Latin America, Central Asia are regions where geopolitical influence has been lost…

In recent years, Russia has been actively recreating its military-technical potential - developing a fleet, aviation and artillery, introducing new types of troops, implementing a new concept of the RF Armed Forces - reducing the number of troops, while increasing their material and technical equipment and mobility, as well as bringing constant combat readiness up to 100%. W announced plans to create Russian naval bases in far-abroad countries - in Cuba, Vietnam and the Seychelles.

And now a moment has come for Russia when it can no longer retreat further and surrender geopolitical boundaries. Sevastopol in Ukraine and Tartus in Syria are points on the map that allow Russia to influence the regions with a military presence. The appearance of a NATO base in Crimea reduces the flight time of missiles to Moscow to 12-15 minutes. The surrender of Tartus means the loss of the only Mediterranean base capable of servicing and refueling Russian warships in the Mediterranean.

That is why Russia's position will be unshakable. Putin demonstrates this without any reservations or conventions. Of course, nobody is interested in bringing the situation to a military clash, but if the “victim” does not change his mind and pull himself together, he will have to knock out bleached teeth from the “Hollywood smile”.

P.S.
As of March 03, 2014, 04:00 Moscow time, Reuters does not confirm the information about Obama's appeal to Congress on the Syrian issue.
However, the issue is up in the air - after the second round of the Geneva talks, the vote on a resolution on Syria is on the agenda in the UN Security Council.
Thanks to

early 2008

The whole specificity of Brzezinski's approach lies in the fact that, unlike the early, naive Fukuyama of the "End of History" era, he perfectly understands that directly all this global political awakening at the moment is directed against none other than the United States, against Western civilization in in general, against its power and dominance on the planet

The last chapter of Zbigniew Brzezinski's book, published in Russian translation under the title "Another Chance" (although its real name is "Second Chance" and, as we will show, the adjective "second" in this case has a fundamental meaning), ends with these words: " America urgently needs to shape a foreign policy truly appropriate to the post-Cold War environment, and it can still do so provided that the next American President, realizing that "the power of a great power diminishes when it ceases to serve an idea," tangibly binds the power of America with the aspirations of a politically awakened humanity." Of course, in these words, the figure that, in the opinion of the former assistant to the President of the United States for national security, is already clearly looming, is capable of serving the implementation of this responsible task - the assertion of America's leadership in the process of global political reorganization of mankind. We are talking, of course, about the young Barack Obama, whom Brzezinski advises on foreign policy issues. It is Obama who, more than any other candidate, is associated with the process of political renewal, not only in his own country, but throughout the world, which Obama threatens to "save." It is Obama who calls for "change" so insistently that the English equivalent of this word - change - is already beginning to enter the global circulation about twenty years ago "glasnost" and "perestroika".

early 2012

Over the past decade, more and more works have appeared in the United States that describe the deterioration of the internal situation in America, the weakening of its international positions and the decrease in its influence on world processes. Among such works is the latest book by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Strategic View. America and the Global Crisis” is of a separate, special interest. The author is not only a prominent scientist and politician, but also one of the ideologists of US foreign policy, a person who belongs to the top of the power establishment of this country. The book will not disappoint the reader. After an introduction that briefly describes the emerging geopolitical situation, Brzezinski moves on to the first part with more than a telling title: "The Fading West." The Euro-Atlantic world, unable to act as a single entity, is in decline.

and Biden, and Kerry, and Psaki, etc. work for this "new world" just like Condi Rice did before them.