Republican Foreign Policy is unlikely to win any Nobel Peace Prizes, but in many instances, it has proven far more effective. The International Community greatly prefers Democrats as Presidents of the United States because they can be counted on to not behave in an aggressive fashion internationally. Its understandable that a more passive approach will seem more appealing, but it also has been demonstrated to not work terribly well. Jimmy Carter's presidency is the best example I can think of to demonstrate this.
One editorial comment: I wouldn't give all the credit to Reagan for the fall of Communism in Europe, but his contribution is drastically understated by most people. One thing is clear: The fall of Communism was one of the most unexpected good things that ever happened in human history. Most of the credit would go to the right circumstances and the right people being in the right places at the right times.
Edit: MMarsh, of the people you listed, only one person was even capable of having a greater impact upon the fall of Communism, and that is Michael Gorbachev. Mainly, people (especially non-Americans) do not see how Reagan's drastic escalation of the arms race was at all helpful. More than that, most non-Americans have an extreme prejudice against any Republican President. Just remember that Mr Nobel himself believed that he had greatly promoted world peace with his invention of dynamite.
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it."
- General Robert E. Lee
Warning, critical pebkac error in the iD10t!! pebkac\wtflolurpwnzd\snafuroflmao.exe called iD10t, iD10t failed to respond!! System in danger!!
"It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I am NOT a big man." -Chevy Chase
Last edited by godofthunder9010; December 13th, 2005 at 22:55..