Bin Ladin killed earlier, does Sept 11 happen

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Emperor Norton I

You're confusing me greatly right now. Are you saying that September 11th will happen because people other than Al-Qaeda will attack the United States on September 11th because of post-Cold War rise in anti-Americanism in the Middle East due to Cold War actions?
If so, no, that's completely wrongheaded. History isn't destiny, and that is the biggest problem with alternate history discussion when people assume as much. There was a terrorist attack on September 11th, with passenger jets hijacked, two planes hitting the World Trade Center, 1 hitting the Pentagon, and 1 headed who knows where before it was downed due to the passengers getting it away from the hijackers, because Al-Qaeda set a plan into motion of training of training people to carry out this plan of hijacking planes and flying them into these major US buildings, set those buildings to be the twin towers, Pentagon, and maybe another landmark, and set the date for September 11th, 2001. That's a specific thing specific to them.
That does not mean that terrorism from the Middle East which you are correct in saying did rise in the post-Cold War period could not affect the United States in the future, but what it does mean is that such terrorism from another group is not going to be the specific plan that went underway on September 11th, 2001 because of the fact that that was the plan that Al-Qaeda planned and undertook.

I never mention the cold war.
Post WWII American policy in the middle east is what I am talking about.
it not so much anti Americanism as anti American policy in the middle east.

The American policy after WWII in the middle east gives a lot of people a motive to plan attack against America.

[Emperor Norton I]

Yeah, but not around 8 AM on September 11th.

And that is what I'm talking about, that you mentioned. US adventurism in the Cold War breeding enemies in the post-Cold war, post-Soviet world. That's what you mentioned as well, though you only mentioned the Cold War era, but it doesn't become an issue until the Cold War is over.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Emperor Norton I

Yeah, but not around 8 AM on September 11th.

True. Could be an attack some where else or with a different weapon or plan.

[Emperor Norton I]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

True. Could be an attack some where else or with a different weapon or plan.

Which is not guaranteed, and is not what this thread is about.

[Republican Jim]

The only way to avoid 9/11 is if Bush is reelected in 1992 instead of Clinton. When the attack on the WTC in 1994 happens, he goes after Bin Laden - killing him then.

[Bob in Pittsburgh]

Ultimately Islamic fundamentalism is larger than Osama. Other leaders undoubtedly would have emerged. Would their plan have been the same? The chance of the specific attack flying commercial airliners into the World Trade Center, Pentagon etc may have been less but there would have been something else. My most enduring memory of 9/11 is not of the Towers falling, it is of the jubilation in the Palestian camps when the towers fell. What this brought home to me was the level of hatred of America. So long as the widespread hatred is there the battle will continue.

[Roger II]

It depends on how he gets killed. Does he have the bad luck to step on a landmine or just trip down a flight of stairs? Then it may well happen. On the other hand, if the PoD is that Clinton's campaign against him and his organization is more sucessful(let's say his energies aren't being sapped by Ken Starr going witchunt or just Monica Lewnisky's hetorfore unkown Canadian aunt takes ill or whatever contrived scenario you pick) then Bin Laden's death would happen around when Al Queda is gutted and unable to attack. We'd probably see smaller attacks but nothing that massive.

[Alex1guy]

If Mr Bin Laden is killed, 9/11 happening depends on the ambitions of whoever succeeds him as leader. Does the successor want to perform the same actions? Maybe, maybe not, we can only speculate based on our limited knowledge of the personalities of his subordainates. I do agree with Belfast, the fundamentalism aimed at the US doesn't change with Osama's early death, there are numerous others who are equally pissed at America for various reasons. Whether or not they have the means or ambition to launch such an audacious attack of similar magnitude, is another matter up for conjecture.

[Dave Howery]

kind of off topic.. ah hell, who am I kidding, it's way off topic... I recently saw a movie trailer on Youtube called "Osombie" which is all about (believe it or not) Osama Bin Laden coming back as a zombie and crawling out of the surf, somehow getting to Afghanistan, and infecting some of his former comrades in arms, who (of course) go after everyone they can get. A group of American super duper soldiers (who seem to have trouble finding shirts) takes them on with swords, machetes, and boring old guns. I don't know if this is an actual movie or a joke trailer (I'm really hoping it's the latter)....

[Alex1guy]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

kind of off topic.. ah hell, who am I kidding, it's way off topic... I recently saw a movie trailer on Youtube called "Osombie" which is all about (believe it or not) Osama Bin Laden coming back as a zombie and crawling out of the surf, somehow getting to Afghanistan, and infecting some of his former comrades in arms, who (of course) go after everyone they can get. A group of American super duper soldiers (who seem to have trouble finding shirts) takes them on with swords, machetes, and boring old guns. I don't know if this is an actual movie or a joke trailer (I'm really hoping it's the latter)....

I'd watch it....

[von hitchofen]

Originally Posted by Derek Jackson

Had Osama Bin Laden either been killed by Western allies or died a natural death some time between January 1 1999 and January 19th 2001 would that have prevented the September11 outrage

if the US killed UBL prior to 9/11/2001 - the attack will probably happen sooner

if he dies naturally before then, it may delay the attack - but not by much as UBL had little influence on the planning of the attack - which was done by Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Mohammed Atta

the only way to prevent 9/11 is to assassinate Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Ziad Jarrah, and Hani Hanjour on 9/10/2001 or earlier

would the FBI or CIA shoot dead Egyptian, Saudi Arabian and UAE nationals on US soil?

[Johnrankins]

Originally Posted by von hitchofen

if the US killed UBL prior to 9/11/2001 - the attack will probably happen sooner

if he dies naturally before then, it may delay the attack - but not by much as UBL had little influence on the planning of the attack - which was done by Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Mohammed Atta

the only way to prevent 9/11 is to assassinate Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Ziad Jarrah, and Hani Hanjour on 9/10/2001 or earlier

would the FBI or CIA shoot dead Egyptian, Saudi Arabian and UAE nationals on US soil?

Only if they resist arrest. If they are on US soil both the FBI and the CIA would want them alive and talking! As they say dead men tell no tales.

[jmc247]

Bin Laden may have been the mastermind of al-Qaeda, but KSM was the mastermine of using planes as weapons against centers of American economic, military and political power (though the last plane didn't make it to Congress or the WH).

Kill Bin Laden in 1996 you might or might not prevent 911, its hard to say as the roots for al-Qaeda's brand of terror were growing thanks to anger fueled by religious radicalism, living in shit dictatorships and the failure of Arab nationalist parties in their wars against Israel and even to get basic services provided to their people.

Killing Bin Laden in the mid or late 90s you still would have had transnational terrorists like Zarqawi rise up to take his place, (back then the two had split from each other and were competing for the loyaty of young jihadis in Afghanistan) it might not have the same name al-Qaeda if Bin Laden was killed in 98, but same general idea would have continued because of the factors present in the Middle East driving it were far far bigger then one man.

[Sausage]

When 9/11 happened i was not surprised. /Something/ was going to happen eventually - the way that the US was treating the world made it pretty much inevitable. [Thats just my opinion BTW not trying to start a fight here.]

Would be an interesting discussion to see how small a divergence it would take to avoid 9/11. Probably not much. But avoiding it would have probably led to an as big or bigger event down the track.

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

No one ever proved that Bin Ladin was responsible for the 9/11 attack.

Ooh...

Truthers!

Truther= Conspiracy theory.

Conspiracy theory = Kick or Ban

<Decision Gate reached>

Kicked for a week.

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by De la Tour

No, because Bin Laden didn't do it.

Ooh...

Truthers!

Truther= Conspiracy theory.

Conspiracy theory = Kick or Ban

<Decision Gate reached>

Kicked for a week.

[Emperor Norton I]

Originally Posted by CalBear

Ooh...

Truthers!

Truther= Conspiracy theory.

Conspiracy theory = Kick or Ban

<Decision Gate reached>

Kicked for a week.

I think he meant that NOT as in it was an inside job, but that it was another terrorist group possibly since bin Laden was never connected to the attack. That is of course wrong, because bin Laden took responsibility for the attack, but they did not know that, and I do not believe anywhere did they support Trutherism.

Please put that kick under review.

[Strategos' Risk]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

True. Could be an attack some where else or with a different weapon or plan.

I think that was the central misunderstanding. Here BELFAST thinks that a 9/11-type plan was inevitable because of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, and so Bin Laden needn't be responsible for it. Whereas this thread is specifically about 9/11, not similar terrorist attacks.

[Cook]

Originally Posted by Unconsensual

Well if you believe that AQ is somehow an international organization with great funding and logistics (yet somehow NATO can't find them for years) then sure.

But the nature of such an organization (decentralized, idealistic, and home-grown) with it's usual recruits from vengeful men (middle east) or socially dysfunctional kids. But even if OBL had a direct hand in 9-11 there's no reason someone else couldn't have planned it or another plan hatched...

Are you trying to imply a conspiracy here?

Originally Posted by Emperor Norton I

...but they did not know that.

So their defence is that they've been living under a rock for the past decade?

[Chortles]

Does the OP mean "if bin Laden is killed before September 11, 2011 ITTL, is the plan still attempted on September 11, 2001 according to the IOTL details of said plan?"