bin Laden, himself, pointed to Reagan's pullout in Lebanon, as well as Clinton's pullout in Somalia, as a sign that America would not fight.
Bush disregards sound military advice, unless you consider Rumsfeld one of the great ground commanders in history. He also lacks the will to prosecute a war. Fallujah should have been leveled by artillery. Bush will go down in history just like LBJ. A free-spending Texan, who fought an unpopular war according to his own concept, while setting the stage for runaway inflation ten years down the road.
This is preposterous. Bush allows the MILITARY to fight the war. He trusts the men on the ground. As to will, had this been Reagan, or Clinton, our troops would be out by now, and Iraq would be in complete and total chaos.
Your economic ignorance is astounding as well, as there is no evidence that inflation will ever to return to the extent it did under Jimmy Carter, who had no deficit.
Reagan did intimidate the Soviets, but it was George H.W. Bush who sent in the ground troops in 1991. One wonders if Reagan, after Lebanon, would have had the will to do it.
Real Annual Growth Rate of Non-defense and Non-Homeland Security Outlays by President:
Johnson +4.1%
Nixon +5.0%
Carter +1.6%
Reagan - 1.4%
Bush 41 +3.8%
Clinton +2.1%
Bush 43 +4.8%
No, history will grade Reagan much higher
It's a shame some folks feel it's necessary to run down one conservative in an attempt to build up another's credentials. I guess the "11th Commandment" only gets invoked when it works in your favor, huh?