What's new
Frozen In Carbonite

Welcome to FIC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Modern What if: no 9/11 terror attacks?

DarthDakka

Active member
Author
As the thread title says: what if September 11th was just a normal day like any other? How would the lack of terror attacks and subsequent invasions into the Middle East as a result of said attacks shape the culture and world of the early 2000’s?
 

Horton

Cat
Administrator
Well, this is gonna lead to a very interesting political situation for America at least and maybe the UK as well. As the war hurt Labors chances as well.

It's not like that the people who originally launched the attacks are going to stop, Bin Laden and co are still going to be around and based on their history with previous attacks, are gonna wanna hit the US again, so what we'd probably see is a second attack down the road, possibly a less serious one then 9/11 as after all, 9/11 was one of the worst in US history. What is possible though is due to Bush lacking the inertia of the whole "War On Terror" thing that he possibly loses the election in 2004 to Kerry and if there is no attacks before that, we'd then have an attack under a Democratic administration, which leads to an entirely different War on Terror...

Now, I don't think based on voting records that it would necessarily be any less aggressive then the original Republican war on terror, but it's possible it might just be and we might have a period in which we just go into Afghanistan rather then both Iraq + Afghanistan. This leaves Saddam in power, meaning he'd be operating a North Korean style state in opposition to the West...now maybe if it isn't butterflied away, that also falls apart in the events of the Arab Spring or perhaps not as Saddam as a very vicious and intelligent person, making me wonder if he'd have managed to outlive it or at least keep his government in power as the country falls into a civil war

So let us say Kerry wins in 2004, alright...then there's a big terrorist attack and he authorizes a war in Afghanistan or maybe just bombing it, which hurts his popularity in the long run more among his own party then it would among the Republicans as it was under Bush, however that is not enough to really unseat him...but here comes the bummer, the global financial crises hits during the Democrat administration. Who gets the blame in the minds of the voters? Well, their fault or not, it's the Dems...meaning McCain likely wins in 2008, I don't think that he's a good or strong candidate myself and I think it'll be close if Obama is against him, but the economy has historically been an excellent predictor of elections and it will likely lead him into power.

So McCain is president, now I don't think he's a particularly strong candidate, so what happens in 2012 is he likely loses to Obama, who will run again I think and beat him nicely. So Obama gets in, in 2012, making the next election a forgone conclusion as the economy will likely be booming from then on forth, meaning he's gonna be hitting a win in 2016...if the GOP nominated Trump, he likely gets wrecked, as he's going against Obama...not Hillary and Obama is like Hillary's policies + Bernie's Charisma, a mix that would wreck Trump.

To sum it up

1. Surviving Iraq. Certainly no ISIS
2. WOT restricted to Afghanistan
3. McCain wins for one term due to GFC but loses for a second
4. No Trump

Overall, I'd say a better world then the one we had?
 

IndyFront

Hypershitlord
Author
Well, this is gonna lead to a very interesting political situation for America at least and maybe the UK as well. As the war hurt Labors chances as well.

It's not like that the people who originally launched the attacks are going to stop, Bin Laden and co are still going to be around and based on their history with previous attacks, are gonna wanna hit the US again, so what we'd probably see is a second attack down the road, possibly a less serious one then 9/11 as after all, 9/11 was one of the worst in US history. What is possible though is due to Bush lacking the inertia of the whole "War On Terror" thing that he possibly loses the election in 2004 to Kerry and if there is no attacks before that, we'd then have an attack under a Democratic administration, which leads to an entirely different War on Terror...

Now, I don't think based on voting records that it would necessarily be any less aggressive then the original Republican war on terror, but it's possible it might just be and we might have a period in which we just go into Afghanistan rather then both Iraq + Afghanistan. This leaves Saddam in power, meaning he'd be operating a North Korean style state in opposition to the West...now maybe if it isn't butterflied away, that also falls apart in the events of the Arab Spring or perhaps not as Saddam as a very vicious and intelligent person, making me wonder if he'd have managed to outlive it or at least keep his government in power as the country falls into a civil war

So let us say Kerry wins in 2004, alright...then there's a big terrorist attack and he authorizes a war in Afghanistan or maybe just bombing it, which hurts his popularity in the long run more among his own party then it would among the Republicans as it was under Bush, however that is not enough to really unseat him...but here comes the bummer, the global financial crises hits during the Democrat administration. Who gets the blame in the minds of the voters? Well, their fault or not, it's the Dems...meaning McCain likely wins in 2008, I don't think that he's a good or strong candidate myself and I think it'll be close if Obama is against him, but the economy has historically been an excellent predictor of elections and it will likely lead him into power.

So McCain is president, now I don't think he's a particularly strong candidate, so what happens in 2012 is he likely loses to Obama, who will run again I think and beat him nicely. So Obama gets in, in 2012, making the next election a forgone conclusion as the economy will likely be booming from then on forth, meaning he's gonna be hitting a win in 2016...if the GOP nominated Trump, he likely gets wrecked, as he's going against Obama...not Hillary and Obama is like Hillary's policies + Bernie's Charisma, a mix that would wreck Trump.

To sum it up

1. Surviving Iraq. Certainly no ISIS
2. WOT restricted to Afghanistan
3. McCain wins for one term due to GFC but loses for a second
4. No Trump

Overall, I'd say a better world then the one we had?
Blade Runner and off-world colonies on the moon by 2021 would be a reality. Sometimes I think its the damn large hardon collider, I think we need to destroy it sometimes.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
An 9/11 style event is a floating certainty (i.e. the event is certain but the time it happens isn't). The only question is how destructive it is. AQ had already made attempts to topple the World Trade Center with the 1993 WTC Bombing being the most visible one.
And in other news, water is still wet.
...why the fuck do we give those bastards money anyway? It’s not like it’s keeping them off our backs.
Because of oil... and the fact that if we don't keep them under our nuclear umbrella they'll try to cash in the favor they have with Pakistan to create their own nuclear weapons stockpile (Saudi Arabia was a major backroller for the Pakistani nuclear weapons program, with the understanding that Pakistan now owed them a favor in creating a nuclear weapons program) and work to built their own nuclear arsenal.

... yeah, that won't end well to be certain.
Blade Runner and off-world colonies on the moon by 2021 would be a reality. Sometimes I think its the damn large hardon collider, I think we need to destroy it sometimes.
That won't happen, too many vested interest in play for that sort of things happening until it's either a) you die or b) you thrive.
 

ScreenXSurfer

Ain't no bitch who can do it like me
Well, I wonder if the surveillance state would be where it is now. Perhaps if 9/11 happened another decade or two after it did OTL, the public would be more wary of allowing the gov't having all this access to their data. Or the privacy scandals of Facebook would never happen because nobody gives a crap?

And in other news, water is still wet.
...why the fuck do we give those bastards money anyway? It’s not like it’s keeping them off our backs.
Right now there is a huge proxy-war going on between Saudi Arabia & Iran as they fund terror groups that ruin each other's day (and everybody else's day). America wants an influence in the middle-east. America and Iran also hate each other's guts. Saudi Arabia is highly influential in the region and is sitting on a lot of wealth & is a customer willing to buy tons of American military vehicles & weaponry. The conclusion writes itself.
 

Mark Poe

The majestic cock
Author
Well, C&C Generals would be a more conventional game depicting a conventional war between the USA and some Asiatic Horde* or something...

In other words, with no/reduced Islamic threat the US would continue to focus on conventional forces, which combine with the lack of wars draining budget/spending would mean the lead in tech would not have been slipped as much as compared to OTL. This would have the effect on the PRC delaying their mass production stage of their armed forces modernization for possibly a decade or so at least, as they would have gauged that their existing tech would still not be good enough for mass production. The side effect of that would be the PRC being less aggressive/belligerent in terms of territorial disputes, which means a less united anti-PRC front in the rest of the Far East and SE Asia.

*no joke:
http://cnc.wikia.com/wiki/File:Red_Guard_concept_art.jpg
http://cnc.wikia.com/wiki/File:Russian_General_concept_art.jpg
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Well, C&C Generals would be a more conventional game depicting a conventional war between the USA and some Asiatic Horde* or something...

In other words, with no/reduced Islamic threat the US would continue to focus on conventional forces, which combine with the lack of wars draining budget/spending would mean the lead in tech would not have been slipped as much as compared to OTL. This would have the effect on the PRC delaying their mass production stage of their armed forces modernization for possibly a decade or so at least, as they would have gauged that their existing tech would still not be good enough for mass production. The side effect of that would be the PRC being less aggressive/belligerent in terms of territorial disputes, which means a less united anti-PRC front in the rest of the Far East and SE Asia.

*no joke:
http://cnc.wikia.com/wiki/File:Red_Guard_concept_art.jpg
http://cnc.wikia.com/wiki/File:Russian_General_concept_art.jpg
Nope, 9/11 is a certainty. If it wasn't that exact day, it would be another. Given that AQ had been planing for this for over a decade. The man behind Philippine Airlines 434 in 1994 was part of the plot to attack the WTC with another truck bomb alongside trying to take out the pope of the day.
 

IndyFront

Hypershitlord
Author
That won't happen, too many vested interest in play for that sort of things happening until it's either a) you die or b) you thrive.
Exactly, I was being the optimist and going with B. Of course, there is the off chance that destroying the LHC would tear apart the fabric of spacetime itself.
 

Jakarta

Cutest Mod
Moderator
Well, this is gonna lead to a very interesting political situation for America at least and maybe the UK as well. As the war hurt Labors chances as well.

It's not like that the people who originally launched the attacks are going to stop, Bin Laden and co are still going to be around and based on their history with previous attacks, are gonna wanna hit the US again, so what we'd probably see is a second attack down the road, possibly a less serious one then 9/11 as after all, 9/11 was one of the worst in US history. What is possible though is due to Bush lacking the inertia of the whole "War On Terror" thing that he possibly loses the election in 2004 to Kerry and if there is no attacks before that, we'd then have an attack under a Democratic administration, which leads to an entirely different War on Terror...

Now, I don't think based on voting records that it would necessarily be any less aggressive then the original Republican war on terror, but it's possible it might just be and we might have a period in which we just go into Afghanistan rather then both Iraq + Afghanistan. This leaves Saddam in power, meaning he'd be operating a North Korean style state in opposition to the West...now maybe if it isn't butterflied away, that also falls apart in the events of the Arab Spring or perhaps not as Saddam as a very vicious and intelligent person, making me wonder if he'd have managed to outlive it or at least keep his government in power as the country falls into a civil war

So let us say Kerry wins in 2004, alright...then there's a big terrorist attack and he authorizes a war in Afghanistan or maybe just bombing it, which hurts his popularity in the long run more among his own party then it would among the Republicans as it was under Bush, however that is not enough to really unseat him...but here comes the bummer, the global financial crises hits during the Democrat administration. Who gets the blame in the minds of the voters? Well, their fault or not, it's the Dems...meaning McCain likely wins in 2008, I don't think that he's a good or strong candidate myself and I think it'll be close if Obama is against him, but the economy has historically been an excellent predictor of elections and it will likely lead him into power.

So McCain is president, now I don't think he's a particularly strong candidate, so what happens in 2012 is he likely loses to Obama, who will run again I think and beat him nicely. So Obama gets in, in 2012, making the next election a forgone conclusion as the economy will likely be booming from then on forth, meaning he's gonna be hitting a win in 2016...if the GOP nominated Trump, he likely gets wrecked, as he's going against Obama...not Hillary and Obama is like Hillary's policies + Bernie's Charisma, a mix that would wreck Trump.

To sum it up

1. Surviving Iraq. Certainly no ISIS
2. WOT restricted to Afghanistan
3. McCain wins for one term due to GFC but loses for a second
4. No Trump

Overall, I'd say a better world then the one we had?
The big one is that if a Kerry administration would even allow 2008 to happen in the first place. Remember, 2008 was caused by banks overlending and then the slow realization that they fucked up caught up to them.

So... perhaps it will be like my Millenium Dawn HOI 4 game where the Democrats push Dodd-Frank years early Horton. So Kerry wins a second term, and maybe an obama/ hillary ticket for 2012 against... who in the Republican side?
 

Tithed_Verse

What's bugging you?
Author
The big one is that if a Kerry administration would even allow 2008 to happen in the first place. Remember, 2008 was caused by banks overlending and then the slow realization that they fucked up caught up to them.

So... perhaps it will be like my Millenium Dawn HOI 4 game where the Democrats push Dodd-Frank years early Horton. So Kerry wins a second term, and maybe an obama/ hillary ticket for 2012 against... who in the Republican side?
Either Jeb/Romney or Mccain/McConnell
 

CTHuskyMan

American Patriot And Deep Thinker
As the thread title says: what if September 11th was just a normal day like any other? How would the lack of terror attacks and subsequent invasions into the Middle East as a result of said attacks shape the culture and world of the early 2000’s?
Hmmm.....good question. Sometimes I think that if the attacks never took place, an even bigger atrocity eventually would've. To this point, I think that a nuclear device may have been detonated in midtown Manhattan......not good. :(
 

ScreenXSurfer

Ain't no bitch who can do it like me
Few other thoughts

  • Oil would be more expensive.
  • Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya will still be in 1 piece (maybe not Afghanistan) as 9/11 was justification the new american century used for regime change.
  • The missing Trillions the pentagon lost, mentioned by Rumsfield on September 10th, would likely have an investigation.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Few other thoughts

  • Oil would be more expensive.
  • Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya will still be in 1 piece (maybe not Afghanistan) as 9/11 was justification the new american century used for regime change.
  • The missing Trillions the pentagon lost, mentioned by Rumsfield on September 10th, would likely have an investigation.
Nope, the problem with 9/11 is that it is literally a 'floating certainty', the exact date may be unknown but it is certain to happen. AQ had been trying to do this for almost a decade, and they're the type to keep at it until it succeeds...
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
What part of my post is nope?
You are forgetting that 9/11 is a floating certainty, where the exact date might be unknown until it happens but it is certain to happen given the variables involved. This is especially true for whom we're dealing with (AQ). If 9/11 didn't happen the way it did, well, the only answer would be 'things get worse, period'. If it didn't happen at 9/11, then it would be 9/12 or 9/13 or 9/20 or basically any other day afterwards.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
A floating certainty means it could have happened 20 years later.
Not in this instance, given the factors involved. AQ's leadership wanted something like 9/11 done soon that year, if I remember right, to shore up their base...
 

DarthDakka

Active member
Author
Not in this instance, given the factors involved. AQ's leadership wanted something like 9/11 done soon that year, if I remember right, to shore up their base...
Lets be glad that they didn't go with their original plan to attack nuclear powerplants...aka 'watch NATO break out the big and very unpleasant guns'.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Lets be glad that they didn't go with their original plan to attack nuclear powerplants...aka 'watch NATO break out the big and very unpleasant guns'.
Or go with the 'assassinate the Pope' idea as well. That wouldn't end well. Period.
 

Aaron Fox

SB's Minor Junker Descendant and Hunter of Nazis
Author
Didn't know about that one. Yeah, that's a great way to have a unofficial new Crusade show up at the door.
A little known aspect is that the man behind the Philippine Airlines 434 had a plan to assassinate Pope John Paul the Second, and it was comprehensive to say the least.
 

Lordroel

Well-known member
As the thread title says: what if September 11th was just a normal day like any other? How would the lack of terror attacks and subsequent invasions into the Middle East as a result of said attacks shape the culture and world of the early 2000’s?
A one term Bush most likely.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top