There's been a lot of discussion on how things would change if 9/11 didn't happen, with most implying or outright stating that the hijackers would be caught before or just after boarding. As part of a pet project I'm working on, the terrorists did take control of the planes. However, all failed to reach their targets a la Flight 93. One could argue that this doesn't count as the attacks did commence, but let's not get into semantics.
I have a rough idea of how things would diverge from OTL and the typical scenarios, but a ton is still up in the air, especially since I haven't decided if the planes should land or crash. For one, nationalistic fervor wouldn't be as severe; there were no blazing infernos to rile the people up. But since it was just too close of a call, I believe there would still be a war on terror, though I have it outlined that Bush doesn't invade Iraq. If the terrorists survive and are interrogated, I see relations between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia breaking down as a concrete link is revealed between them and the hijackers. Public anger might even be directed at Riyadh rather than Baghdad.
But I don't know much about this, what do you think.
I have a rough idea of how things would diverge from OTL and the typical scenarios, but a ton is still up in the air, especially since I haven't decided if the planes should land or crash. For one, nationalistic fervor wouldn't be as severe; there were no blazing infernos to rile the people up. But since it was just too close of a call, I believe there would still be a war on terror, though I have it outlined that Bush doesn't invade Iraq. If the terrorists survive and are interrogated, I see relations between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia breaking down as a concrete link is revealed between them and the hijackers. Public anger might even be directed at Riyadh rather than Baghdad.
But I don't know much about this, what do you think.