What would life be like if 9/11 never happened?

Typo

Banned
I doubt it actually.

Without Afghanistan to get US into a war already, and without the hysteria against Arabs in general I doubt the Bush Admin could get the US into Iraq.
 
I doubt it actually.

Without Afghanistan to get US into a war already, and without the hysteria against Arabs in general I doubt the Bush Admin could get the US into Iraq.
Without 9/11 Bush does not have the political cover to go into Iraq.
 

Pkmatrix

Monthly Donor
Without 9/11 Chinese-American relations would be MUCH colder than OTL. Remember, pre-9/11 the Bush Administration (and US government in general) was treating China as if it were the second coming of the USSR (Remember the spy plane crisis in 2001? Or the fallout of the US bombing the Chinese embassy in Serbia in 1999?) and talking about how China needed to be contained - it was very antagonistic. 9/11 changed that: our focus switched from China to al-Qaeda and we became much friendlier with Beijing. Perhaps saying America and China would be enemies without 9/11 is a stretch, but I'd say a plausible result of no 9/11 attack is US-Chinese relations being comparable to OTL US-Russian relations.
 
So I take it that the hijackers were caught? I'm guessing in this ATL the CIA and FBI and whatnot are more cooperative.

I don't think we'd be able to go into Iraq in this ATL, if Clinton couldn't do it with his "evidence", then the Bush in this ATL probably wouldn't be able to either. Bush changed after 9/11, so without it he'd probably just do the usual "try to get the UN to do something about the WMDs" routine/song and dance. So Saddam would remain the "Boogeyman of the Middle East" that he was during the 90's. Bin Laden would still be the "religious weirdo nut out in the deserts who wants to kill America", and still seen as harmless by everyone outside of the various intelligence agencies.

China would probably be the biggest concern, rivalled only by the problems in the Middle East. Just because there's no 9/11 doesn't mean those issues disappear.

Anyway, that aside, I really don't know who the Democrats would, in a world where 9/11 never happened, elect to run against Bush in 2004.

-Al Gore wouldn't be chosen, he came with too much baggage from the contested 2000 election. Plus he was pretty content OTL to follow his other interests.

-Don't think Hillary would run, I think she was still wanting to take a slight break from intense politics. Plus her running would polarize the Republicans against her due to her last name.

-Dean was running on an anti-war platform OTL, so without that, Dean really has nothing. So he'd probably not have a chance. And even with that platform in OTL, he botched the huge lead he had.

-They'd probably go with Kerry, he had the "War Hero" thing going, (though that didn't help McCain) so he's a possibility, but I doubt people would overlook his activities during Vietnam like in OTL. Would they make much of a difference in this ATL is the big question.

-Joe Lieberman running would split the entertainment industry, (some of the biggest fundraisers for the Democratic Party, look at how they were in the '04 and '08 elections) due to his activities in regards to video games, music, movies, etc. So he'd be too risky to be the main ticket headliner. Plus he was connected with the 2000 election, too much baggage.

So I'm not really seeing much hope for a one-term Bush presidency in this ATL. 9/11 contributed to alot of the economic problems of the day (and probably still some now), so I don't know what kind of economy there'd be in a world where the Trade Towers are still standing. There were problems being talked about before 9/11, but it didn't seem like it wasn't manageable. So.... besides those who were still bitter over the 2000 Election, I really don't see much in the way of strong Democratic Candidates.
 
In the absence of any other serious contenders, John Edwards might have been the Democratic nominee in 2004.

Bush was able to use his popularity as a wartime president to help unite his base. Without that, he probably faces a more divided Republican Party and a defection of libertarian/fiscal conservatives as they stay home.

Music probably has a more "Pop" sound. Hip hop might become more fragmented into various sub-genres and the "Cool" hipster crowd might be even more self-defensive and snobby than they are now :)

Michael Moore would focus on the financial crisis when it hit (no "Farenheit 9-11"). He would probably make a movie about Katrina.

Dennis Miller might stay more to the left/libertarian side on the issues than he does now.

What happens to blogging, which began to take off after 9-11 and especially during the Iraq War? Little Green Footballs was primarily about surfing and software; Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) focused on libertarian issues.
 
Depending on how a 'no 9/11' went down Afghanistan might or might not happen... If it is butterflied due to TTL's police forces working together and catching the terrorists Bush might get enough votes to authorize Afghanistan. If it's due to a car crash or something like that Bush has no reason to go into Afghanistan.

Iraq isn't happening... at most Bush will get a Clinton style cruise missile strike.

US / China relations are much colder and it hurts both nations economies... A plausible (imo) absolute worst case scenario is a war (possibly nuclear) over either Taiwan or Kim Jong Il stirring up some shit on the Korean peninsula.

US relations with other places like Europe and S. America are in general better but not all that much so...

Dems retake either House or Senate or both in 2002...

Bush gets re-elected in 2004 on a strong / strengthening economy over Dem challenger John Edwards...

Dems do not make anywhere near the gains TTL in 2006... they possibly even lose some seats...

Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency over McCain in 2008. The Dems hold the House but not the Senate...
 
I remember reading a comment from either a friend of the Bush family or a reporter, maybe Bush Sr.'s biographer, to the efffect that W told him he wanted to be a war president. He may or may not have mentioned Iraq specifically at the time, but it certainly was regarded as a target by the defence establishment from the time of Clinton, and the cultural meme of Saddam as enemy was present from Hot Shots to South Park to White House press conferences ever since the Gulf War.

My bet is that Iraq was going to happen with or without 9/11. Do you remember the huge propaganda campaign used to sell the war OTL? Do you remember the elaborate intro sequences to news coverage with jets and tanks and Saddam firing his rifle from a balcony while reviewing troops marching under those cool giant swords? Do you remember the grave threat posed by Nicaragua in the 80's? If Bush wanted a war, which he apparently did, he could have had one. The decision to make war isn't made in front of TV cameras or reported in the New York Times.
 
Bush got re-elected based on a "wartime presidency" in 2004. It still came down to only 30,000 votes in SW Ohio. So why is everybody here treating his re-election as a fait accompli?:confused:
 
Last edited:

Geon

Donor
no 9/11 a General Overview`

Assuming that the September 11th attacks didn't take place you still have the Taliban and al Queda in existance. First, remember that al Queda was responsible for the embassy bombings in Kenya and Nigeria. It was also involved in the bombing of the Cole.

With no 9/11 attack you would most likely have a more covert attempt by the Bush Administration to take out bin Laden and his al Queda crew. More likely you have CIA and military "advisers" helping select warlords in Afghanestan with training in exchange for their help in a covert war against the terrorists. The same would be true in Yemen, Somali, and other nations.

There is no war in Iraq or Afghanestan. Bush's term (I only see him as a one term president) is a quiet one marked by a concentration on domestic matters. How successful he is I must leave open to speculation given the varied political views of those on this website.

The biggest change I see is in conservatism as a whole. The September 11th event had the effect of bringing the conservative movement together. I think after the 9/11 attacks the conservative movement in this country took on the idea of "It's not paranoid if they're really out to get you." It dawned on many people in the U.S. that there indeed was an enemy "out to get us" who had no love for the U.S. or its culture. As a result in OTL you have a much more conservative us vs them mindset both domestically and in international affairs. With no 9/11 incident the conservative movement is far more fragmented in TTL.

Geon
 
Michael Moore would focus on the financial crisis when it hit (no "Farenheit 9-11"). He would probably make a movie about Katrina.

OR maybe he'd actually go and do something more constructive with his time than devote most of it to his weird stalker-crush on Bush. :p Without the Iraq War to twist Michael Moore's nipples (your welcome for that mental image) he'd probably devote his time to his anti-gun beliefs, so he'd probably make a follow-up to his "Bowling for Columbine" movie.

or make a movie about how the Republicans are in league with the Red Skull and that's how they STOLE the 2000 election. :D
 
Well, not to be a selfish prick, but big differences for me. My neighbors's husband is still alive, both of their kids didn't go into Counter Terrorism, and instead went into Aeropace Engineering and Accounting like they'd always planned. I never get so interested in Iraq and Afghanistan as per OTL, either because they don't happen or because my neighbor's son doesn't talk my ear off about it like he did OTL before he got DQ'ed from enlisting due to his full spectrum color blindness. Lacking anything but a passing interesting in military affairs, I'd have never really considered AROTC. Its weird when you notice that 9/11 may have made your career choice, I know I was only eight at the time,and a lot could've changed regardless, but I'd always wanted to be a doctor before then, I was god damned obsessed with it. After that I've only truely wanted to be an officer, this is trippy.
 
Last edited:
You'd be able to go to the cockpit and see the pilots at work, which was stopped after 9/11 (for obvious reasons).

Airport security would be less strict.

No war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thousands of soldiers and civilians would be still alive.

America would continue to spy on Afghanistan.
 
Sorry to rain on everyones perade but Al Qaeda hated America. hated our guts. So assuming there is no 9-11 wouldn't it be likely that ITTL wether 9-11 was butterflied away or the terrorists caught, I think it would be likely that a (9-11) would happen sooner or later and could possibly be worse
 
OR maybe he'd actually go and do something more constructive with his time than devote most of it to his weird stalker-crush on Bush. :p Without the Iraq War he'd probably devote his time to his anti-gun beliefs, so he'd probably make a follow-up to his "Bowling for Columbine" movie.

Or make a movie about how the Republicans are in league with the Red Skull and that's how they STOLE the 2000 election. :D

James A. Baker III is the Red Skull!?:eek: You said it, I didn't. Makes sense though. Let's be honest with ourselves people. The federal judiciary (at all levels) stole the election. It doesn't matter for who they did it. The whole idea in the US Constitution of federal judges not being involved in the presidential election process is because they would be empowering themselves (and have now done) to determine the politics of their judicial successors. The identity of POTUS 43 should not have come down to Sandra Day O'Connor's sick husband and William Rehnquist's bad back.:(

January 11th, 1954. The last time a conservative was replaced by a liberal on the US Supreme Court (Earl Warren). And the GOP has never forgotten it.
 
Sorry to rain on everyones perade but Al Qaeda hated America. hated our guts. So assuming there is no 9-11 wouldn't it be likely that ITTL wether 9-11 was butterflied away or the terrorists caught, I think it would be likely that a (9-11) would happen sooner or later and could possibly be worse

Unfortunately, you are absolutely right.:mad:
 
Unfortunately, you are absolutely right.:mad:

Too true.:) For all the criticisms the TSA gets, does anybody really want to go back to the private enterprise security of using 70 year old inspectors with fused vertebrae and severe cataracts?:mad: As a federal employee myself, I can tell you this: The TSA knows damn well they could be wiped off the books in the event of a series of security failures, and are desperate enough to protect their jobs (and benefits) that they will put out an effort you just won't see from nonprofessionals.
 
Top