What would have been the results of George Herbert Walker Bush handling Iraq like his son did? In other words, conquer the entire country and change the regime?
One butterfly would have been that Saudi Arabia would not have supported this, and the USA did not use Saudi territory to attack Iraq in 2003. This could mean that Osama Bin Laden would be less radicalized, so no 9-11 attacks.
Other butterflies would have been no UN support, after all they didn't back the 2003 invasion (which was a flagrant violation of international law) and much less international support, with only Britain and maybe Canada joining the Americans (Canada and Australia would have taken diametrically opposite stances from what they did with the 2003 invasion because the PMs would be different in both countries).
Invading Iraq would have been doable without use of Saudi territory by having the Marines assault Kuwait amphbiously first. And this time the Turks might have allowed use of their territory.
One butterfly would have been that Saudi Arabia would not have supported this, and the USA did not use Saudi territory to attack Iraq in 2003. This could mean that Osama Bin Laden would be less radicalized, so no 9-11 attacks.
Other butterflies would have been no UN support, after all they didn't back the 2003 invasion (which was a flagrant violation of international law) and much less international support, with only Britain and maybe Canada joining the Americans (Canada and Australia would have taken diametrically opposite stances from what they did with the 2003 invasion because the PMs would be different in both countries).
Invading Iraq would have been doable without use of Saudi territory by having the Marines assault Kuwait amphbiously first. And this time the Turks might have allowed use of their territory.