Is that strong or weak? The question is meaningless. The more important question is strong or weak for what purpose?
Clinton gave North Korea nuclear technology with no oversight. Given that technology by Clinton, they now have the ability to take out a few west coast cities.
Al Quada attacked us how many times during Clinton's tenure? Clinton did nothing.
The Black Hawk down incident, where Clinton refused the give our troops the tanks they requested as back-up, has been mentioned by OBL and Saddam Hussein. Both thought it showed how weak America's military was.
I've read a few dozen articles that tell the story of how Clinton was offered OBL's head on a platter, but he refused saying he didn't think he could indict him on any charges!
Then of course we have the Cox Report and Bill Gertz's excellent book about China and how CLinton sold China nuclear technology in exchange for $$.
I thought these things were so well known to Freepers that I wouldn't need to elaborate when I mentioned I thought Clinton was weak on foreign policy. I wasn't trying to parse words like "weak" and you may call it anything you want, but I call it being a lousy president and derelict in his duty to protect the nation.