Would people say that Bush would have been better, worse, or neither? Would Bush be remembered much at all?
How would Bush be remembered if Gore won in 2000 and captured or killed Bin Laden at Tora Bora?
- Thread starter darklordoftech
- Start date
Bush would be nothing but a political footnote, while Gore's swift and decisive action, quickly restored the new Millenium optimism that had been suspended since the 9/11 attacks. A quick death for Bin Laden and the Taliban means no war on terror. No War on terror means the swift preservation of the 2000 to 2001 New Millenium culture. The Dance-Pop boybands, the upbeat pop-punk, the Y2K Fashion, both western and Asian, the hope, the optimism, the drive to keep going forward to a better tomorrow and everything else that goes with it. By the time 2004 comes around and the culture of the decade once again begins to morph and change, I guarantee that things will definitely be different from what they were IOTL.
Last edited:
I have read that CIA wanted a Ranger Bn located in Oman at time along with 3 Bns of 10th Mountain be utilized for Tora Bora operation. Rumsfeld apparently thought it could be done more cheaply with a few SF teams and air bombardment. He was wrong
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
If we have the power to change history once at one point, I don't see a reason why we shouldn't do it twice.
Rumsfeld, against the advice of the Generals, left Tora Bora to the local forces, and the local forces failed to secure all the exits.
marathag
Banned
A few platoons airlifted in is not a guarantee of a kill or capture. The decade long number of operations after 2001 in Afghanistan proves that.
So the PoDs keep increasing
Gore Wins
has a Sec Def to go with airlifting in an entire company of Troops, Hell, why not a Brigade while we are making stuff up.
and then catching/killing OBL when he had plenty of practice avoiding larger number of Soviet and other troops from his field operations after 1987, like he did from the 2000 Afghan Fighters who really wanted to catch/kill him for their own reasons in September 2001
Sure, that could happen.
And OBL could have just choked to death on some mutton.
That's the easier PoD
Marc
Donor
Why assume that 9/11 occurs at all under a Gore Presidency?
You could make a conditional argument that the attack, both in timing and nature, was predicated on certain dynamics that existed in Bush Presidency, but not in supposed Gore one.
The problem is always going to be that we simply don't know precisely how sensitive certain people and events were to the historical equations.
You could make a conditional argument that the attack, both in timing and nature, was predicated on certain dynamics that existed in Bush Presidency, but not in supposed Gore one.
The problem is always going to be that we simply don't know precisely how sensitive certain people and events were to the historical equations.
One weird thing people found according the Al-Qaeda files after OBL's death was that the main Al Qaeda commanders thought the whole thing was ridiculous and overblown, and wanted to do something closer to home (Middle East, Near East). OBL wanted to do this big propaganda coup and pushed for it, resulting in one of the biggest acts of terror ever.
One possible PoD is that the more 'sensible' commanders win out and talk him down, rather than the other way around.
Bush would be just another failed Presidential candidate. Ironically though, that would be better for his legacy - I for one would rather be remembered as a popular Governor of Texas than one of the worst Presidents of all time.
The thing is too the 9/11 conspiracy was already financed and in operation with people training in the US by Nov. 2000 and the FBI wasn't that even-odds close to figuring out what was going on. I don't think a Gore Presidency would go much differently.
The US military was both cocky and ill prepared for the battle. Gore being in the WH ain't Going to change that.
No. That’s the post facto excuse the US military gave out for its manifest failures.