Reagan believed strongly in his own diplomacy to the mid-east, is this a model for the next President?

Question

I've been reading the Reagan diaries, and, it is clear he used his office to form personal ties to leaders in the mid-east, in contrast with George W., should our next President be more proactive in this way to help along peace and diplomatic clarity?

Answer 1

His former co-star Bonzo would do better at diplomacy than GWB ever has. I don't know about Reagan's diplomacy.
Getting a bunch of Marines killed and never holding the people accountable who planned it does not sound too good either.

Answer 2

Reagan did what was appropriate at that time. A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. That includes the first World Trade Center attack, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and 9/11. There comes a time when diplomacy becomes an excuse for inaction.

.

Answer 3

We now have had two models, the diplomatic and the warlord, neither have worked, the Middle East is a mass of conflicting tribes and religious sects, none of the countries is terribly secure in its government, a fact that they have been slow to realize is due to the same factions the United States is fighting now. The Muslims want a very strict Muslim state, with (of course) themselves as the rulers. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt all have had assassination attempts with this in mind. Should diplomatic overtures be made instead of jumping in with tanks? Of course, its the great failure of this Administration that they ran in first, and asked questions later. Not to mention that when they didn't like the answers they ignored them. Just think, all that money, all those troops, none of it needed to be spent. No ties to Al Qaeda, no WMDs, no traveling chemical plants. No reason to go in. We could have let them take care of Saddam, if they didn't like him well they all seemed to have guns to shoot when the towers went down, they could have aimed a few in his direction.
Hey nemrod if you have a problem with me, don't email me with death threats and then hide under another name, the 777 kind of gave you away.

Answer 4

Yes, he should proactively destroy all the islamic fundamental countries and leave all the secular, Jewish or Christian ones.

That would solve a lot of problems.

I think Regan would have already destroyed Iran, laid waste to all of Iraq and be looking hard at Turkey and Syria. I am sure one of the Korea's would be missing and Hugo would be taking a dirt nap.

Good suggestion.

Answer 5

If Bush did just as you suggest then liberals would still bash him