Bin Ladin killed earlier, does Sept 11 happen

[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

[MrwBrightside]

I doubt it. Al Qaeda had other leaders in the waiting that could have taken up Bin Laden's position and execute such an attack. It wasn't him who flew the planes into the buildings, anyway.

[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. In the end as long as the USA was seen supporting Israel and blundering through the Middle East there was bound to be pissed off people.

Now interesting fact, did you know that home-grown extreme right terrorists have been killing the same number of Americans per year as foreign terrorism? But hey they are Americans living on land that have no Geo-political value, they aren't foreign, easily identifiable, or living on strategic land.

[Emperor Norton I]

I swear I saw a documentary on bin Laden where it said that others in his terrorist organization didn't want to carry out that action because it would be a massive and direct attack on the United States that would draw a massive and direct targeting of al-(don't wanna type the rest so I don't get cyber tracked by the Federal government) by America.

[BELFAST]

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

[Shaby]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

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

Wait, what? A congratulatory message and an admmission of responsibility is somehow inadequate?

[Corbell Mark IV]

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. In the end as long as the USA was seen supporting Israel and blundering through the Middle East there was bound to be pissed off people.

Now interesting fact, did you know that home-grown extreme right terrorists have been killing the same number of Americans per year as foreign terrorism? But hey they are Americans living on land that have no Geo-political value, they aren't foreign, easily identifiable, or living on strategic land.

That seems pretty unlikely.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Shaby

Wait, what? A congratulatory message and an admmission of responsibility is somehow inadequate?

Do you have a source for this info?

[Shaby]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

Do you have a source for this info?

Well, his numerous video addresses on both given voluntarily to Al-Jazeera or captured by US forces on site in Afghanistan seem to contain his claiming responsibility for assigning the hijackers, financing the operation and so on. At least that is what I remember from those past 10 years.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Shaby

Well, his numerous video addresses on both given voluntarily to Al-Jazeera or captured by US forces on site in Afghanistan seem to contain his claiming responsibility for assigning the hijackers, financing the operation and so on. At least that is what I remember from those past 10 years.

seem to?

do you have any links to this info?

[Shaby]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

seem to?

do you have any links to this info?

Well, searching on You Tube? Checking on wikipedia (I know, I know, not the most reputable source, but this 9/11) cites a video broadcasted by Al-Jazeera on May 2006 where Bin Laden explicitly claims responsibility. Try searching 'bin laden message 9/11'

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Shaby

Well, searching on You Tube? Checking on wikipedia (I know, I know, not the most reputable source, but this 9/11) cites a video broadcasted by Al-Jazeera on May 2006 where Bin Laden explicitly claims responsibility. Try searching 'bin laden message 9/11'

Problem with goggle search on the subject is it keeps showing nutty conspiracy stuff.

[De la Tour]

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

No, because Bin Laden didn't do it.

[mowque]

This thread is going off the rails rather quickly...

[Emperor Norton I]

Originally Posted by De la Tour

No, because Bin Laden didn't do it.

Explain what you mean by that, please.

[BELFAST]

assuming Bin Laden did order it. it may not have stopped the attack.
there were many others who could have ordered the attack.
not a fan of the Great Man theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory

[mowque]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

assuming Bin Laden did order it. it may not have stopped the attack.
there were many others who could have ordered the attack.
not a fan of the Great Man theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory

So everything in history is pre-ordained?

[Emperor Norton I]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

assuming Bin Laden did order it. it may not have stopped the attack.
there were many others who could have ordered the attack.
not a fan of the Great Man theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory

Originally Posted by mowque

So everything in history is pre-ordained?

My problem with the great man theory is that it assumes that history is based only on major individuals. My problem with the academic action of throwing out of the great man theory is that many who do so wrongly assumes that major individuals have no more impact on history than anyone else, which isn't true since the more power or influence you have, the more you can affect things around you, or at least the more likely you are to have a wider impact than someone not of those assets. A guy who can launch a nuclear war likely has more impact than a construction worker who died of lung cancer at 55 in 1977.

If bin Laden is killed, that could indeed change September 11th. He's the one that oversaw the organization that carried it out. He's the one that ordered it. What it depends on is when he ordered it, which I don't know offhand. And, if it was underway by the time of this ATL death, if the succeeding leader of that terrorist organization would change the plan, cancel it, or alter it in anyway.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by mowque

So everything in history is pre-ordained?

The problem is not who ordered the attack but why the attack was ordered.
CIA report on the subject said it was blow back from long term US foreign policy in the middle east.
Blowback (intelligence)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowbac...ntelligence%29

There are a lot of people with a motivation in the middle east to attack America.

Only way to reduce the chances of the attack is to reverse long term US policy in the middle east.

[Emperor Norton I]

Originally Posted by BELFAST

The problem is not who ordered the attack but why the attack was ordered.
CIA report on the subject said it was blow back from long term US foreign policy in the middle east.
Blowback (intelligence)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowbac...ntelligence%29

There are a lot of people with a motivation in the middle east to attack America.

Only way to reduce the chances of the attack is to reverse long term US policy in the middle east.

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.