US attacks Israel in '03 instead of Iraq. My first TL in the making.

It appears the poor soul has been scared off.

Although Gimple's timeline is really unworkable, a more general time line based on the premise that Mossad (or a "rogue element" thereof) was actually behind 9/11 and that this was discovered in the days after the attack would be interesting. There are several basic ways this could be played out, including: (1) the Bush Administration receives clear evidence from the CIA but choses to keep this knowledge entirely secret as it decides on a response that may or may not include back-door against Israel as well as the immediate perpetrators (duped Al Qaida operatives and the Taliban regime, I guess), (2) the information is made public but the USA works to separate the actions of Mossad from Israel itself, (3) the USA breaks relations with the current Israeli government and demands authority to round up and punish Israeli perpetrators itself - while still not aligning itself with Israel's enemies, and (4) the US essentially decides that Israel is an ally not worth having anymore and seeks rapproachment with the oil-rich middle eastern states on the basis of full support for Palestinian aspirations.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
The difference is that this only applied to part of Maryland. The Courts also fed Lincoln his lungs on the matter.

The simple fact that the courts could overrule the Commander in Chief, during an insurrection, is pretty much proof that Matrial law was not in effect nation-wide.

To be fair to Gimple in an otherwise abysmal TL, the suspension of habeas corpus in 1862 by Lincoln allowed martial law: "all Rebels and Insurgents, their aiders and abettors within the United States, and all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to Rebels against the authority of United States, shall be subject to martial law and liable to trial and punishment by Courts Martial or Military Commission".

Now clearly this doesn't mean what Gimple is taking it to, and Lincoln's declaration was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan 71 US 2 [1866], the judgement of which also discussed when martial law could be exercised.

Other than that, I have no defence to offer this TL. Even the POD is unlikely, how do you get David Duke elected without resorting to massive amounts of handwaving?
 

Xen

Banned
I'm 99% sure that all the people in the Presidential Order of Succession are never even in the same city; even for big public events like the State of the Union where everyone is supposed to be in attendance one person in the order of succession gets taken to a "secure location."

Im 100% sure this will never happen. There is a thing called the Designated Survivor. If everyone is killed in a nuclear blast in Washington D.C. then the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (or someone else) would be found in a coal mine in West Virginia or something. He would then be sworn in as the next President.
 
I don't see how Duke's election correlated to a "more successful" 9/11 for al-Qaida. I guess we can say Bush was having a cabinet meeting that day. (BTW - SoHS does not yet exist)
Two PODs then?
Who is falsifying all these documents? That should be explored.
For sure. For now this is just a TL in the works. I would probably put someone in Duke's court as the falsifier.
This doesn't make sense, as stated before, but Martial Law on Washington, DC, New York City, and probably some other major cities could be imposed. I don't think the Continuity of Operations Plan would (have) covered this event, so it's possible that the military (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs? some charismatic General?) could take over Washington, and by extension the United States in the immediate aftermath.
Probably more workable then a federal martial law.
I can't imagine Congressman Duke making a speech in front of the Nation of Islam, even during a crazy, post-attack election season. The Nation of Islam sorta, kinda consider themselves Arabs (or Muslims, rather), so declaring himself against Arabs in front of the NoI seems like a bad idea, and I don't see how he could pull it off..
flhape.jpg

How so? Is it just closely tied? Or are they mostly "Independents" in the House & Senate, presumably local citizens who were spurned to enter politics in the post-attack? Maybe alot of former Republicans and Democrats decided to run for election as "Americans" in a non-partisan hopeful post-attack world.
I probably should have been more clear, I wasn't since this is only a TL not the full story or even an outline. I was thinking something along the lines of locals seeing a chance at office.

Kind of busy with life, I'll do more at a later date.

rp-and-db.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top