Worse than any since Kennedy, but to a purpose: the end of the Soviet Union, which he actually achieved.  Kennedy blundered into his crises by projecting weakness, and being worse than weak in the Bay of Pigs invasion, Reagan at least was making a calculated gamble that paid off, when few thought the inevitable end of the Soviet Union could be a fraction as peaceful as it was.<p>And I noticed no &quot;new course&quot; on his part, your claim elsewhere in this discussion that it made &quot;him determined to sit down with the Soviet leadership&quot; is not supported by my memory.  He was certainly willing to &quot;sit down with&quot; them, he just wasn&#x27;t willing to surrender even more to them.  The accession of Gorbachev to was almost certainly a more significant factor (then again, maybe Gorbachev&#x27;s hand was strengthed by Able Archer 83 et. al.), and note for example the much hyped &quot;failure&quot; at Reykjavík following the earlier one in Geneva.