By tradition, such assemblies begin with a speech by the President of the United States. The 71 Assembly is no exception. Let me remind you that President Obama’s first speech was in 2009. Many readers remember his speech, which two months later was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Yes exactly. It was the performance that was honored with the Nobel Prize, and not the activity as president of the United States.
"I know very well what expectations are connected with my rule around the world. But these expectations are not related to me personally, but rather based on rejection of the status quo, in which we were too dependent on emphasizing the differences between us. They are also based on the belief that real change is possible. "
The last speech of the “lame duck” is already permeated by completely different ideas. 8 years of governing a country such as the United States, numerous wars in various countries, the collapse of the world system of economic relations, millions of migrants - this is only a small part of the "achievements" of Barack Obama. Nobel laureate "screwed" the world enough.
Naturally, the American president urgently needed a scapegoat. With a sore head and a healthy one. Fortunately, the candidate for this position should always be. And if it is not, then we must urgently come up with. How al-Qaeda was invented at the time. But since then, a lot of water in the brains of overseas leaked, so that with the new products it has become difficult. So new is good (?) Forgotten old. That is Russia.
"In our world, which had left the era of empires long ago, we see Russia trying to regain its glory by force."
"One of the signs of the imperfection of world diplomacy is the fact that some countries allow themselves to violate international law."
And what's new? Where?
As you can see, the usual American "focus." Black is now white, and white has turned black. It was as if the world had forgotten about the sacrifices that made it possible, or rather, organized "some countries" headed by the country of Obama. Verbal casuistry, designed not for serious diplomats, but for the crowd of “frail” Clinton voters.
However, was Obama's speech so unexpected for Russia? Did we even know in general about its content? Naturally.
In one of my articles I wrote that the Pentagon and the White House are well aware of the weaknesses and advantages of their army. And the armies of states - likely opponents, too. And the conclusion is the same. The modern American army cannot guarantee victory over Russia or China even one by one.
Deprived of its advantages in the air, it has become a tool to fight against third world states. In tool to oppress weak countries. The appearance of modern types of weapons in such countries acts on Americans as a cold water tub. Sober instantly.
And as if in confirmation of my findings, the New York Times newspaper 6 of September publishes an article by David Sanger. The essence of the article boils down to the fact that after some doubts and discussions in the White House, President Obama agreed to the possibility of "delivering a nuclear strike first."
As I think, the epic of "Obama's peacemaker" ended. I remember the months-long information processing of Russia and China through the same newspaper and several other government publications. The world was convinced that Obama wants to stay in stories as a peacemaker. As president, abandoning the doctrine of a preemptive strike on a likely opponent.
All played up. I'm tired. And, like a normal man and the master of his word, having given him, he took it back.
The growth of the combat power of Russia and China as a thorn in ... the Americans. Numerous provocations on the Russian borders and in the South China Sea are not particularly disturbed by the Russian and Chinese authorities. The answer is ready or almost ready. The US military is increasingly facing a violent response to such provocations. "Invincible American ships" are "pushed out" from the territorial waters. Fearlessly American scout planes were sent there without fear.
According to the American edition, the “parents” of the new US doctrine were Secretary of State Kerry, Secretary of Defense Carter and Admiral Hayni, head of the Strategic Command. They "persuaded" President Obama. They were the ones who made Barack Obama “forget” his own words spoken by 7 years ago.
The United States, "as the only nuclear power that has already applied nuclear weapon"wants" to seek peace and security in a world without nuclear weapons.
Even at the beginning of this year, the American president said roughly the same thing. I mean his performance when visiting Hiroshima. Remember his call to members of the nuclear club - "have the courage to break out of the logic of fear and strive for peace without it"?
Today, without much pomp and publicity, the United States embarked on a deep modernization of its nuclear potential. Moreover, this is done at once in many directions.
So the famous American submarines of the Ohio class are planned to be replaced by more advanced ones equipped with new ballistic missiles. The cost of such a replacement is staggering - almost 100 billion dollars.
The US Air Force will be replenished with another hundred B-21 strategic bombers. This machine is already a new generation. And they are planning to equip them not only with nuclear bombs and missiles, but also with "long-range cruise missiles" with nuclear warheads that are being developed today. Such missiles will practically deprive the enemy of the possibility of a retaliatory strike, since they can be used even before the borders of the other side. This "pleasure" today will cost American taxpayers approximately 80 billion dollars.
The development of new ICBMs has begun. Pleasure is also not cheap - about 85 billion dollars. Missiles of the new generation will be able to overcome the enemy's missile defense. Some answer to the Russian "doomsday weapon".
In general, today we can say that the Americans are returning to the days of the cold war and the arms race. Simply put, they fell into the pit that they had dug for a long time in Russia. According to Western experts, today the modernization of nuclear weapons and carriers, the Americans will need more than a trillion dollars. What kind of "printing press" will withstand such loads? Only the best in the world is American.
It is clear that the upcoming elections in the United States have become the catalyst for such decisions. Candidates are forced to "reveal cards." And the closer the decisive day, the more such "cards" we will see. If you look closely at what is happening today at the US electoral sites, it becomes clear which of the candidates is more dangerous for us. Who actively "push" the hawks of America.
In the same way, it becomes obvious that Russia has correctly chosen the vector of development of the army and fleet. This is probably the first time we are not catching up, but ahead of it. Let in some parameters, but still ahead. And this inspires some confidence in the future.
Returning to Obama's speech at the UN Assembly. I will return only because in the light of the described decisions and plans of the United States, his words are very ambiguous.
"A lot of work has been done that has changed the lives of many people and that would not exist without the desire to cooperate." "If you compare the current situation with the end of the Cold War, the world is now more prosperous, less cruel, although more unpredictable."
Indeed, the best can not be said about the "time of Obama." Much more ... unpredictability and "prosperity." Especially where Americans "have changed the lives of many people." There everything just blooms and smells. The whole question is just what.