WI: Decapitation Strike 9/11

[Sabot Cat]

Suppose that 9/11 had better planning than it did in OTL, and thus occurred on February 27th 2001 or January 29th 2002 during the State of the Union address. Hijacked planes crash into the Twin Tower, the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol building, killing most high ranking officials in the federal government but the designated survivor which would be Secretary of Veteran Affairs Anthony Principi in 2001.

What are the effects, outside of making Tom Clancy look like a prophet?

 

[THE OBSERVER]

You might make Frederick Forsyth a prophet as well. Years before 9/11, he had an idea for a novel involving terrorists using airplanes as weapons.

 

[Paul V McNutt]

1 or January 29th 2002 during the State of the Union address.

The one cabinet member who stayed away would be president. I am going to see if I could find out who that was.

 

[Paul V McNutt]

It was Gale Norton, who was Interior Secretary. Here is some reading about her http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/feds_probing_gail_norton_for_corruption_lat.php

Of course the supposed corrupt practices happened in 2006, when ITTL she would been President or Ex President. She would have had the support of the people behind as she came to office in a time of crisis. She probably launches a war in Afghanistan and maybe Iraq. While I doubt Saddam tried to kill her father, she would have had the same neo con advisors as W did.

 

[thekingsguard]

It was Gale Norton, who was Interior Secretary. Here is some reading about her http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/feds_probing_gail_norton_for_corruption_lat.php

Of course the supposed corrupt practices happened in 2006, when ITTL she would been President or Ex President. She would have had the support of the people behind as she came to office in a time of crisis. She probably launches a war in Afghanistan and maybe Iraq. While I doubt Saddam tried to kill her father, she would have had the same neo con advisors as W did.

Actually, you have to wonder how many of them would have died in Congress It might be easier to make a list of who WOULD still be in office after this.

On one of the few upsides, with the Dems and Republicans gutted, odds are good we may see some kind of unity ticket or independents and third party officials elected to Congrss

 

[katchen]

One thing about Gale Norton, she would be serious about opening up public lands to oil and gas exploration to make the US energy independent. With a new Congress made up of winners of special elections, she would probably be able to do it. Even the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.
Gale Norton might not be all that interested in invading Iraq.
It would be a very interesting Congress. Because everyone would basically be starting fresh, the Senate seniority rules would mean that the Senators from the largest states would be considered to be the most senior. Which would put California's new Senators in the driver's seat. Which at the time might mean Jerry Brown, Arnold Schwartzenegger, Cuomo, Mark Spitzer, Rick Perry, perhaps Barack Obama, Newt Gingrich (who was out of office, I believe), Lawton Childs, Pat Toomey,

 

[Simon]

On one of the few upsides, with the Dems and Republicans gutted, odds are good we may see some kind of unity ticket or independents and third party officials elected to Congress

You're much more optimistic than me. Given that as I understood things the replacement Congressmen and Senators to serve out the remainder of the terms are mostly picked by the state governors or legislators, who are themselves politicians, I can't see politics just disappearing overnight, especially so for the following elections when political power would really be up for grabs. The party machines are still there, likewise the people that ran for the party nominations but lost out to the winner etc.

 

[Sabot Cat]

I believe Gale Norton would be butterflied away as the designated survivor by delaying 9/11 to 2002, so it really could be anyone. As for who would be elected afterwards, I would be kind of scared of a new 'War Congress', wherein most people to be elected post-9/11 (1/29?) campaign with an aggressive foreign policy and the like.

 

[Mike Stearns]

As for who would be elected afterwards, I would be kind of scared of a new 'War Congress', wherein most people to be elected post-9/11 (1/29?) campaign with an aggressive foreign policy and the like.

Agreed. Virtually the entire executive branch has just been assassinated, along the Joint Chiefs and possible the entire Supreme Court. The gloves will come off. And be thrown in the trash.

 

[Torqumada]

You might make Frederick Forsyth a prophet as well. Years before 9/11, he had an idea for a novel involving terrorists using airplanes as weapons.

So did Tom Clancy. He was actually interviewed on 9/11/01. The reporter asked him point blank if he could ever imagine if terrorists using airplanes to attack the US. You could tell from the look he was considering say it. "Could I ever imagine it? I wrote a book about it. You just said it in my introduction."

Torqumada

 

[Mike Stearns]

So did Tom Clancy. He was actually interviewed on 9/11/01. The reporter asked him point blank if he could ever imagine if terrorists using airplanes to attack the US. You could tell from the look he was considering say it. "Could I ever imagine it? I wrote a book about it. You just said it in my introduction."

Torqumada

I remember that, because when 9/11 happened that was one the first things that I thought of. I also recall that he was told that after he wrote Debt of Honor that the US Air Force had supposedly decided that it wanted a response plan for this type of attack.

 

[Athelstane]

One difficulty for an attack like this would not only be the greater coordination and planning needed, but also that all of the attacks would have to be done at night. That was a consideration for al Qaeda, given the limited training of its pilots. It's harder lose your way in broad daylight.

What would the effects be? I shudder to think. Afghanistan would end up a much more intense operation.

 

[Sabot Cat]

One difficulty for an attack like this would not only be the greater coordination and planning needed, but also that all of the attacks would have to be done at night. That was a consideration for al Qaeda, given the limited training of its pilots. It's harder lose your way in broad daylight.

Hmm.. the night aspect does pose difficulties. Perhaps the first inauguration would be better because it takes place on the same date in the same place without fail, all during the daytime? Timing, although difficult, would not be a complete crapshoot as well because the oath of office is usually administered at around 12pm.

What would the effects be? I shudder to think. Afghanistan would end up a much more intense operation.

Could you imagine that timeline's equivalent to the PATRIOT Act?

 

[Paul V McNutt]

President Gale Norton would enjoy popular support in the beginning of her term. rRepublicans would do well in special elections of 2002. tThe Senate would be more complicated.I don't know how many Senators would be replaced by Governors of what party. I don't know how many states require a special elections. I assuming there is a scandal so she loses in 2004 to a Democratic Governor. wWith her sSupreme Court appointments her legacy lasts a long time.

 

[Andrew T]

Republicans control significantly more state governorships than Democrats, both in 2001 and now. So -- and again, this is without my checking for state statutes governing appointments vs. special elections -- you have the potential to radically reshape the composition of the 2001 Senate after the "decapitation strike, which at the time was 51-49 Democratic (after Jeffords' defection).

Moreover, as I look closely at it, a significant chunk of the Democratic leadership comes from states that in 2001 had Republican governors, incluidng CT (John Rowland), FL (Jeb Bush), IL (George Ryan), MA (Jane Swift), MI (John Engler), NV (Kenny Guinn), NJ (Donald DiFrancesco), NY (George Pataki), RI (Lincoln Almond), and WI (Scott McCallum).

If they all can appoint new Senators, that's a potential net swing of 17 seats to the Republicans, and take a look at who the Democrats would lose: Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, Harry Reid, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Carl Levin, Russ Feingold, Chris Dodd, Joe Lieberman, Bob Graham, Bill Nelson, Debbie Stabenow, Jack Reed, Herb Kohl, Bob Torricelli, and Jon Corzine. (!)

Obviously, the Republicans will lose some of their prominent Senators as well, but the Republican bench in 2001 draws heavily from a lot of Governors. So not only will you get a more militant, rally-around-the-flag administration and Congress, but you will probably wind up with a significantly more conservative Senate and an opposition party that can either go with candidates who are distinctly not ready for prime time (Dean, Obama) or retreads (Al Gore).

 

[Anaxagoras]

You have constitutional chaos. The Senate can be put back together pretty quickly, but it will take time to hold special elections to rebuild the House. And until that time, no legislation can pass and no funding bills can be originated. The new President could quickly order retaliatory strikes in response to the attack, but when the money runs out there will be no new money forthcoming, unless the various states have gotten off their asses and somehow held special elections at record speed.

After 9/11, Larry Sabato called for a constitutional amendment that would "create a Continuity of Government procedure to provide for replacement Senators and Congresspeople in the event of extensive deaths or incapacitation." Lord knows it would make a lot of sense.

 

[Sabot Cat]

You have constitutional chaos. The Senate can be put back together pretty quickly, but it will take time to hold special elections to rebuild the House. And until that time, no legislation can pass and no funding bills can be originated. The new President could quickly order retaliatory strikes in response to the attack, but when the money runs out there will be no new money forthcoming, unless the various states have gotten off their asses and somehow held special elections at record speed.

After 9/11, Larry Sabato called for a constitutional amendment that would "create a Continuity of Government procedure to provide for replacement Senators and Congresspeople in the event of extensive deaths or incapacitation." Lord knows it would make a lot of sense.

My proposal for this kind of scenario: state legislatures select from among themselves a number of representatives equal to that of the vacated seats without a change in the sum of party affiliations, with their choices confirmed by the Governor of the state or by a referendum.

 

[jmc247]

You have constitutional chaos. The Senate can be put back together pretty quickly, but it will take time to hold special elections to rebuild the House. And until that time, no legislation can pass and no funding bills can be originated. The new President could quickly order retaliatory strikes in response to the attack, but when the money runs out there will be no new money forthcoming

The President would be virtual dictator if the Congress and the Supreme Court was wiped out. Money would be irrelevant as he would be able to order businesses to do whatever he damn well pleased and would be able to raise taxes and institute a draft on his own.

Elections would be held again in time and his power would already slowly decline as the war goes on, but in the short term the President would have dictatorial powers and the public and American industry would follow his edicts.

 

[redlightning]

There will be no war in Iraq at least.

 

[Apollo 20]

One difficulty for an attack like this would not only be the greater coordination and planning needed, but also that all of the attacks would have to be done at night. That was a consideration for al Qaeda, given the limited training of its pilots. It's harder lose your way in broad daylight.

What would the effects be? I shudder to think. Afghanistan would end up a much more intense operation.

For anyone with even the most rudimentary flight training in the operation of large commercial aircraft, finding DC at night wouldn't be difficult in the least, particularly if one could program the FMC (Flight Management Computer) of the Boeings used in the OTL attacks; you set a waypoint as longitude and latitude and fly toward it in LNAV mode. If you want to do it the old fashioned way, the VOR at Washington National is pretty close and you can fly the appropriate outbound radial to the Capitol or fly that radial's reciprocal inbound from the east. In any case, having flown into and out of DC National more times than I can count, the Mall and Capitol are pretty distinct and easy to find day or night provided you have good visibility and are below whatever cloud cover there may be.

If there's an issue in all this, it's finding a plane departing at a suitable time. IIRC, the SOTU happens at around 9 PM ET, which means that you'd not have a whole lot of domestic transcontinental flights leaving at the appropriate time of day as in 9/11. You would have, however, the possibility of using some of the later departures to Europe out of JFK leaving around the right time (roughly 8-830 PM Eastern). That could actually be worse than OTL's 9/11, as you'd then be dealing with larger aircraft loaded with even more fuel. A 747 headed to Europe loaded with fuel...not good.