Inspired by this article.
First of all, I think America's international prestige would be greater. The justification for the Afghanistan War was a pretty clear cut case of retaliation for an attack against the US. As for the war itself, it might still be ongoing, but it would have been the Taliban that got smashed by the combination of the 'surge' and David Petraeus. It's possible that they could have been driven from western Afghanistan and forced to regroup in northern Pakistan. There might even have been a US withdrawal.
Tony Blair's reputation would be much greater in Britain. I doubt he'd still be Prime Minister, though. Most likely, he'd either have retired with dignity at some point, or resigned from the party leadership after losing the 2010 election.
The big question, of course, is Iraq itself. I think the author here isn't far off about Iraq and Iran acting as counterweights. Iran would have remained a regional pariah while Iraq maintained an alliance with Syria.
One interesting possibility is a US-Iran rapprochement. Saddam's Iraq would remain the most hostile nation to the US in the Middle East, and if the Bush administration tried to emphasize containing Iraq, then I could see them reaching out to Iran, treating them as a slightly kookier Saudi Arabia. If so, Iran might not start a nuclear program.
Then comes the Arab Spring. Most likely, Iraq would be another Syria (if Assad couldn't maintain control, I doubt Saddam could). But there would be three things different. First, there would be no remnant of Al Qaeda in Iraq to serve as a precursor to ISIS, although perhaps Zarqawi would have established something similar. Second, the United States would not be as tired of foreign intervention. Third, the Kurds would be almost certain to rise up against Saddam, and if Saddam used chemical weapons against them (which he probably would), it would be portrayed by the media not just as an atrocity, but as a genocide. At that point, US intervention would probably happen. Probably with boots (and, more importantly, tank treads) on the ground.
First of all, I think America's international prestige would be greater. The justification for the Afghanistan War was a pretty clear cut case of retaliation for an attack against the US. As for the war itself, it might still be ongoing, but it would have been the Taliban that got smashed by the combination of the 'surge' and David Petraeus. It's possible that they could have been driven from western Afghanistan and forced to regroup in northern Pakistan. There might even have been a US withdrawal.
Tony Blair's reputation would be much greater in Britain. I doubt he'd still be Prime Minister, though. Most likely, he'd either have retired with dignity at some point, or resigned from the party leadership after losing the 2010 election.
The big question, of course, is Iraq itself. I think the author here isn't far off about Iraq and Iran acting as counterweights. Iran would have remained a regional pariah while Iraq maintained an alliance with Syria.
One interesting possibility is a US-Iran rapprochement. Saddam's Iraq would remain the most hostile nation to the US in the Middle East, and if the Bush administration tried to emphasize containing Iraq, then I could see them reaching out to Iran, treating them as a slightly kookier Saudi Arabia. If so, Iran might not start a nuclear program.
Then comes the Arab Spring. Most likely, Iraq would be another Syria (if Assad couldn't maintain control, I doubt Saddam could). But there would be three things different. First, there would be no remnant of Al Qaeda in Iraq to serve as a precursor to ISIS, although perhaps Zarqawi would have established something similar. Second, the United States would not be as tired of foreign intervention. Third, the Kurds would be almost certain to rise up against Saddam, and if Saddam used chemical weapons against them (which he probably would), it would be portrayed by the media not just as an atrocity, but as a genocide. At that point, US intervention would probably happen. Probably with boots (and, more importantly, tank treads) on the ground.