What if Instead of the Paris Terrorist Attacks similar attacks happen in the United States Instead

I could definitely imagine a few things
Honestly if the US has an attack bigger then FL but very public in say mid 2015 it likely would kill the Trump train before he got to be nominee because the public never really believed he had answers on foreign policy.

It was immigration and vast anger as in a mile deep anger on Obama's executive order on immigration that that galvanized Republicans to Trump.

Either way it speeds up Obama by a factor of over a year having a semi real military build up in Iraq as part of a semi real lead from behind war. Obama did get there, but it was a slow being dragged bit by bit to it process in Iraq.
Who do you think would win the republican nomination and election then?
 
Hmm... with Ted Cruz on the ticket, I could imagine Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and possibly Iowa coming back to the Democrats, that is if Trump is out of the ticket with the 11 Sept-esque attaque.
 
Hmm... with Ted Cruz on the ticket, I could imagine Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and possibly Iowa coming back to the Democrats, that is if Trump is out of the ticket with the 11 Sept-esque attaque.
What about Ted Cruz on the ticket as a vice president to Trump.
 
Cruz is a plausible Trump VP (ignoring the weird VP choice he made OTL), but we saw the issue of winning this election was winning the Rust Belt. Can Cruz win this region versus Clinton? He will--especially in the primaries--have to focus hard on immigrants and Muslims--maybe combine them, the threat of Muslim terrorists sneaking in from Mexico as congressman Louie Gohmert warned us about, say. The Republican primaries especially are going to pivot around this issue, and going by the 2016 election, Cruz and Trump are the ones to benefit, unless you can get someone like Rand Paul to somehow get something out of this.
 
I'm thinking the terrorist attack would look like this.

  • Occurs on December 2nd, 2015. The same day as OTL San Bernardino attacks
  • Multiple attacks across the United States happen near simultaneously.
  • Omar Mateen enters the Pulse Nightclub with a second shooter, both wearing body armor. They precede to kill 110 people due to attacking at a busier time and a second shooter being present.
  • The San Bernardino attack happens on schedule, however explosive left behind by them detonate and kill and injure several first respondents. Together they kill around 24 people.
  • At a sports arena in Virginia a suicide bomb goes off in a crowd, causing panic and killing half a dozen people. Once people flee the stadium, four more bombers join the crowd with three of them detonating while completely surrounded by people. All together 79 people are killed, either through the explosions or by being trampled.
  • In the New York Subway almost a dozen bombings happen along the line, similar to the 2004 Madrid train bombings. 251 are killed in the bombings.
  • On the streets of Chicago two large trucks leave the streets and begins mowing down pedestrians on the sidewalks. Together the two drivers manage to kill 50 and 62 people, bring their total killcount to 112.
  • During a Christmas Parade, several men open fire with automatic rifles and detonate bombs. Together they manage to kill 178 people before they are killed or retreat. This happens in Austin, Texas.(Not sure if they have a Christmas Parade December 2nd there.)
  • At two nightclubs in Las Vegas, shooters open fire before detonating suicide bombs. In combination they manage to kill 54 people.
  • At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology a shooter opens fire in one of the dorms, killing eight students.
  • All of these attacks combined kills 816 Americans while wounding thousands of others.
  • They find that these attacks were perpetrated by both homegrown Islamic terrorists and foreign nationals who traveled to the United States.
  • They found they most shooters gained access to their weapons through legal and semi-legal channels.(Such as bringing weapons across state lines.)
  • Through investigation they found that all attackers had links to the ISI
How does the United States people and public react to this, how does this effect the United States election and the foreign policy of Barrack Obama. Would the U.S become more involved in Iraq or would the Iran Nuclear Deal fail to pass.
 
Last edited:
Nope the media wouldn't have taken him seriously and given him billions in free air time if immigration wasn't the issue.
You're not paying attention. Immigration would still be an issue, if not more so, if the US had another "YUGE" terror attack. The question is whether Trump's "dovish" foreign policy would hurt him with a hawk like Hillary.
 

Thothian

Banned
I'm thinking the terrorist attack would look like this.

  • Occurs on December 2nd, 2015. The same day as OTL San Bernardino attacks
  • Multiple attacks across the United States happen near simultaneously.
  • Omar Mateen enters the Pulse Nightclub with a second shooter, both wearing body armor. They precede to kill 110 people due to attacking at a busier time and a second shooter being present.
  • The San Bernardino attack happens on schedule, however explosive left behind by them detonate and kill and injure several first respondents. Together they kill around 24 people.
  • At a sports arena in Virginia a suicide bomb goes off in a crowd, causing panic and killing half a dozen people. Once people flee the stadium, four more bombers join the crowd with three of them detonating while completely surrounded by people. All together 79 people are killed, either through the explosions or by being trampled.
  • In the New York Subway almost a dozen bombings happen along the line, similar to the 2004 Madrid train bombings. 251 are killed in the bombings.
  • On the streets of Chicago two large trucks leave the streets and begins mowing down pedestrians on the sidewalks. Together the two drivers manage to kill 50 and 62 people, bring their total killcount to 112.
  • During a Christmas Parade, several men open fire with automatic rifles and detonate bombs. Together they manage to kill 178 people before they are killed or retreat. This happens in Austin, Texas.(Not sure if they have a Christmas Parade December 2nd there.)
  • At two nightclubs in Las Vegas, shooters open fire before detonating suicide bombs. In combination they manage to kill 54 people.
  • At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology a shooter opens fire in one of the dorms, killing eight students.
  • All of these attacks combined kills 816 Americans while wounding thousands of others.
  • They find that these attacks were perpetrated by both homegrown Islamic terrorists and foreign nationals who traveled to the United States.
  • They found they most shooters gained access to their weapons through legal and semi-legal channels.(Such as bringing weapons across state lines.)
  • Through investigation they found that all attackers had links to the ISI
How does the United States people and public react to this, how does this effect the United States election and the foreign policy of Barrack Obama. Would the U.S become more involved in Iraq or would the Iran Nuclear Deal fail to pass.


With that kind of widespread and bloody attack against lots of soft targets ..... well ..... I don't think the words really exist to describe the blood-mad rage that would grip the US populace. The only thing that would be worse is nuclear terrorism.

Probable responses:

a huge gun control push, with the high probability of a national gun registry for ALL firearms

A massive wave of hate-crimes against Muslims: mosques being bombed and set on fire, Muslims beaten by mobs in public; essentially a huge such wave of attacks that would overwhelm authorities, requiring National Guard units in many states to restore order

an absolutely murderous bombing campaign against all ISIS held population centers; the prevailing opinion among many Americans being " there are no innocent Muslims in ISIS territory. If you don't rise up and throw them out, you are as responsible for their actions as they are." ; so, tens of thousands killed in just a few days

serious debate in the US as to whether or not limited use of nuclear weapons against terrorist held areas would serve as a huge exclamation point on America's fury

federalization of all National Guard units in preparation to invade Syria

PLEASE NOTE: I am not personally endorsing ( or not endorsing) these possibilities. Most Muslims would never even think of doing something like these attacks. I am simply giving my honest opinion of what I believe would be the indescribable rage in the US, and the things it would lead to.
 
With that kind of widespread and bloody attack against lots of soft targets ..... well ..... I don't think the words really exist to describe the blood-mad rage that would grip the US populace. The only thing that would be worse is nuclear terrorism.

Probable responses:

a huge gun control push, with the high probability of a national gun registry for ALL firearms

A massive wave of hate-crimes against Muslims: mosques being bombed and set on fire, Muslims beaten by mobs in public; essentially a huge such wave of attacks that would overwhelm authorities, requiring National Guard units in many states to restore order

an absolutely murderous bombing campaign against all ISIS held population centers; the prevailing opinion among many Americans being " there are no innocent Muslims in ISIS territory. If you don't rise up and throw them out, you are as responsible for their actions as they are." ; so, tens of thousands killed in just a few days

serious debate in the US as to whether or not limited use of nuclear weapons against terrorist held areas would serve as a huge exclamation point on America's fury

federalization of all National Guard units in preparation to invade Syria

PLEASE NOTE: I am not personally endorsing ( or not endorsing) these possibilities. Most Muslims would never even think of doing something like these attacks. I am simply giving my honest opinion of what I believe would be the indescribable rage in the US, and the things it would lead to.

You aren't gonna get those gun bans. Actually, you're even less likely to than attacks like Sandy Hook, since these are terrorists using guns.

Again, there just isn't going to be a Kristallnacht against Muslims. People were not bombing mosques after 9/11. Lynch mobs were not forming to kill Muslim families. What would happen is more lone-wolf style hate crimes (quite a bit more). More Muslims being shot, even more being verbally harassed. Maybe with a Sikh temple shooting style attack or two. Those types of attacks would be the ones that really make headlines (unlike the smaller-scale hate crimes), and roundly criticised in the media, including the right-wing media the same way Omar Mateen's shooting was condemned by even the antigay crowd (with few exceptions).

People already think that about ISIS. But these bombing campaigns against ISIS are too precise that they'd be unlikely to make casualties numbers a fraction as big even if intensified. Plenty of innocents dead, of course, as in current drone strikes, but not on those levels.

Nuking a city would be completely out of the question. That would have to wait until ISIS actually gets their hands on nukes and deploys them against the United States.

This one's debatable, and happening in election season, could be a major issue. Iraq is a bigger possibility since we've already been there and ISIS had such a huge amount of territory.
 
You aren't gonna get those gun bans. Actually, you're even less likely to than attacks like Sandy Hook, since these are terrorists using guns.

Again, there just isn't going to be a Kristallnacht against Muslims. People were not bombing mosques after 9/11. Lynch mobs were not forming to kill Muslim families. What would happen is more lone-wolf style hate crimes (quite a bit more). More Muslims being shot, even more being verbally harassed. Maybe with a Sikh temple shooting style attack or two. Those types of attacks would be the ones that really make headlines (unlike the smaller-scale hate crimes), and roundly criticised in the media, including the right-wing media the same way Omar Mateen's shooting was condemned by even the antigay crowd (with few exceptions).

People already think that about ISIS. But these bombing campaigns against ISIS are too precise that they'd be unlikely to make casualties numbers a fraction as big even if intensified. Plenty of innocents dead, of course, as in current drone strikes, but not on those levels.

Nuking a city would be completely out of the question. That would have to wait until ISIS actually gets their hands on nukes and deploys them against the United States.

This one's debatable, and happening in election season, could be a major issue. Iraq is a bigger possibility since we've already been there and ISIS had such a huge amount of territory.
With that kind of widespread and bloody attack against lots of soft targets ..... well ..... I don't think the words really exist to describe the blood-mad rage that would grip the US populace. The only thing that would be worse is nuclear terrorism.

Probable responses:

a huge gun control push, with the high probability of a national gun registry for ALL firearms

A massive wave of hate-crimes against Muslims: mosques being bombed and set on fire, Muslims beaten by mobs in public; essentially a huge such wave of attacks that would overwhelm authorities, requiring National Guard units in many states to restore order

an absolutely murderous bombing campaign against all ISIS held population centers; the prevailing opinion among many Americans being " there are no innocent Muslims in ISIS territory. If you don't rise up and throw them out, you are as responsible for their actions as they are." ; so, tens of thousands killed in just a few days

serious debate in the US as to whether or not limited use of nuclear weapons against terrorist held areas would serve as a huge exclamation point on America's fury

federalization of all National Guard units in preparation to invade Syria

PLEASE NOTE: I am not personally endorsing ( or not endorsing) these possibilities. Most Muslims would never even think of doing something like these attacks. I am simply giving my honest opinion of what I believe would be the indescribable rage in the US, and the things it would lead to.
I like that there is disagreement. I'm unsure which one of you is correct however, potentially both of you on a few points.
 

EMTSATX

Banned
From the timeline given by the OP (prior to Iowa) I think you get a very different Republican nominee. Think about it, who was the biggest Neo-Con on the Stage? I think you might have President-Elect Rubio right now.
 
Top