If the budget deficit cripples the government for the forseable future, it won't matter what happened in the middle east.
I suppose he has a chance, but it depends if our world image goes up.
FDR had some pretty big deficits in the Depression and WWII. Let you in on a little secret, nobody gives a sh**t about deficits after you're gone unless they hate you anyway and are driven to nitpicking.
He won't be seen as the one who made it happen, nor should he be, but he will be regarded as one of many leaders who saw what the middle east could become.
None of this happens without GWB. Nothing.
Why should I care about the form of government in countries with such horrible cultures I'll never go there as a tourist.
You don't go to Thailand anymore? They have a large Muslim population, as you know.
What if leads to more theocracies?
What if your mom leads to more theocracies?
Generally, national leaders are regarded as "great" by the citizens of the nation a lot more for doing things that directly benefit the nation itself than for doing things that benefit other people and only indirectly benefit the nation in a way that would likely be over the head of the average person. If his foreign policy attains vindication by becoming a resounding success, he certainly will be remembered as a great president, but I doubt one of the greatest; his domestic policies so far have only been so-so at best. Plus, he's never really given any memorable quotes (okay, any memorable quotes that put him in a positive light), which, while it may seem trivial, is probably a big hit against him as far as history goes.
That may be true in Canada, but here we tend to love our foreign policy champions. Our generals especially, but also Presidents like Truman, T. Roosevelt, and Reagan are known first and foremost for foreign policy and they're widely beloved.
Poll
