>>>far too much of a pacifist on foreign policy
>
>I recently read An American Life, Ronald Reagan's autobiography.
>I was surprised to read that almost from the moment he took office, for all his blustery speeches, Reagan set about trying to improve diplomatic relations with our worst enemies.
>He had extensive personal correspondence with the three leaders who preceded Gorbachev, all to no avail, but he never stopped trying. Finally, he was able to reach Gorbachev on a personal level, leading to the most important achievement of his presidency- the end of the cold war.
>To be sure, he also credits our military buildup, but there was no doubt that in his mind his reaching out to the Russians is what made the difference.
>
>He also initiated extensive personal contact with the leaders in Iran, including Ayatolla Khomeini but he was never able to accomplish anything with them.
>
>From I could tell, when he learned the real facts about nuclear war when he became president, he was aghast and set about making sure that it would never happen.

I've heard/read about that, and certainly the presence of Reagan helped greatly to facilitate the end of the cold war. But beyond that, it's a bit of revisionist history and I don't buy it. The truth is that Reagan was overrated and always went after the lowest of the low hanging fruit (e.g. Grenada).

My biggest issue with Reagan was the retreat after the bombing of the Marine barracks in 1983. The U.S. had good intelligence that the attack was from Hezbollah, which was funded/supported by Iran. The U.S. would have been absolutely justified in launching strikes in response, but Caspar Weinberger convinced Reagan not to attack. So the U.S. did NOTHING. Absolutely NOTHING. By contrast, the French launched air strikes against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in the Bekaa Valley. We had nothing to accomplish with Khomeini, no bargains or deals to make.