If the WTC was destroyed in 1993 what would have happened?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 08:55:04 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History
  Alternative History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  If the WTC was destroyed in 1993 what would have happened?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: If the WTC was destroyed in 1993 what would have happened?  (Read 2613 times)
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,611
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 04, 2020, 03:58:14 PM »

The intention of the 1993 attack was to have the North Tower fall on the South Tower, destroying both. The death toll would probably have been astronomically higher than 9/11. What does Clinton do at home and abroad?
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,459
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2020, 04:39:43 PM »

Clinton would probably respond like Bush responded after 9/11: seek out al-Qaeda at all costs & send troops to the country where we believe they're hiding. At the time, bin Laden & Co. were based in Sudan, & given how the Sudanese government kicked him out in 1995 for planning to assassinate the President of Egypt, I think we can comfortably presume that they'd at least give the Americans fuel & directions on their way to arrest him themselves.

And like Bush mostly abandoned his hopes for education reform after 9/11, Clinton would abandon his hopes for healthcare reform to instead focus on this event. Perhaps without focusing on healthcare & the rallying effect (assuming Clinton acts, which I think he would), the Democrats can presumably hold the House in 1994, though an earlier War on Terror might be enough to drag Powell into the 1996 election, but unless Clinton badly f**ks up post-attack, he'd probably still get re-elected.
Logged
(no subject)
Jolly Slugg
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 604
Australia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2020, 01:54:26 AM »

I think that in this scenario the Republicans in alt-1996 "choose" (as they won't have any other option) someone with strong defence and foreign policy credentials, if not outright someone with actual military experience.
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2020, 06:21:27 PM »

Clinton would probably lose in 1996, presumably to Colin Powell (if he runs) or John McCain.

Remember, 9/11 only helped Dubya because he was able to exploit it for his own reelection (and invading Iraq). I can't see Clinton being able or willing to do the same.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,808
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2020, 06:11:02 PM »

Probably no 1994 style R sweep in Congress which hurt Gore more than it did Clinton, since he was a 3rd term Clinton in 2000, due to Lewinsky and impeachment.  Probably no OKC bombing either
Logged
StateBoiler
fe234
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,890


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2021, 09:04:44 AM »
« Edited: November 23, 2021, 09:15:19 AM by StateBoiler »

Clinton would probably lose in 1996, presumably to Colin Powell (if he runs) or John McCain.

Remember, 9/11 only helped Dubya because he was able to exploit it for his own reelection (and invading Iraq). I can't see Clinton being able or willing to do the same.

Pilots and squadrons from the city I lived in were deployed to go bomb Belgrade in the middle of the president's existential crisis scandal.

Clinton goes hawkish to counter the 1993 impression that all Democrats since Lyndon Johnson are doves that can't handle defense and foreign policy properly. Think it's likely the Republican Revolution does not occur to near the degree it did. I don't feel we know how 1996 can play out, I can see arguments either way.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2021, 09:35:34 AM »

Clinton would probably lose in 1996, presumably to Colin Powell (if he runs) or John McCain.

Remember, 9/11 only helped Dubya because he was able to exploit it for his own reelection (and invading Iraq). I can't see Clinton being able or willing to do the same.

Yeah, Bill Clinton is such an honorable man, good call.
Logged
DaleCooper
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,852


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2021, 03:46:29 PM »

Clinton would probably lose in 1996, presumably to Colin Powell (if he runs) or John McCain.

Remember, 9/11 only helped Dubya because he was able to exploit it for his own reelection (and invading Iraq). I can't see Clinton being able or willing to do the same.

Are you kidding? Clinton could've turned a 1993 9/11-scale terrorist attack into a 40+ state landslide.
Logged
CEO Mindset
penttilinkolafan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 925
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2021, 06:54:09 PM »

Democrats go even more hawkish than GOP 15-20 years early.
US as much of a police state as OTL 2021 even earlier.
Americanism evolves into a demonic pentecost even faster.
Woke Capital and woke military become things earlier.
Logged
(no subject)
Jolly Slugg
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 604
Australia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2021, 04:50:58 PM »

WI: someoneone crashes a jet aeroplane into the Twin towers on sept 11, 1981…. when Ronnie Reagan is president?
Logged
CEO Mindset
penttilinkolafan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 925
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2021, 06:27:52 PM »

WI: someoneone crashes a jet aeroplane into the Twin towers on sept 11, 1981…. when Ronnie Reagan is president?
Reichstag fire-equivelant and able archer WWIII.

the People's Republic of South Africa, Australia and Brazil as the great powers in a ruined world.
Logged
Agonized-Statism
Anarcho-Statism
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,802


Political Matrix
E: -9.10, S: -5.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2021, 05:58:39 PM »
« Edited: December 09, 2021, 06:09:51 PM by Anaphylactic-Statism »

The 1990s wouldn't be a conga line of disaster like the 2000s since there would still be technology-driven economic growth and no challenges to US hegemony on the horizon, but there would be the wars and anxiety over terrorism to put a damper on things. Less End of History, more Clash of Civilizations. Grunge would be bigger. Clinton would be a war president and narrowly beats Colin Powell in 1996, then John McCain wins 2000. If I had to guess, by 2004, there's been wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, and the Internet bubble has finally burst, so that might be a realignment election for someone more populist or progressive. None of the usual suspects- Obama is too young, Hillary is tied to Bill, probably not Trump or Sanders. Maybe Russ Feingold or John Edwards.

One interesting side effect would be a crackdown on the militia movement, COINTELPRO-style. Definitely a lot more Internet regulation.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,468
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2021, 10:20:07 AM »

Clinton wouldn't have invaded Iraq, but Afghanistan for sure. Would have turned out basically the same mess at did post-2001 since this was always a war that couldn't be won on the battlefield.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,678


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2021, 01:39:25 AM »

Clinton wouldn't have invaded Iraq, but Afghanistan for sure. Would have turned out basically the same mess at did post-2001 since this was always a war that couldn't be won on the battlefield.

As pointed out above, A. Bin Laden was in Sudan at the time, and B. the Taliban hadn't even taken over Afghanistan yet (this was more or less accomplished in 1996).

So...no invasion of Afghanistan. Invasion of Sudan might happen! That'd...not be good at all.
Logged
Agonized-Statism
Anarcho-Statism
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,802


Political Matrix
E: -9.10, S: -5.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2021, 08:59:03 PM »
« Edited: December 17, 2021, 12:26:01 AM by Anaphylactic-Statism »

Clinton wouldn't have invaded Iraq, but Afghanistan for sure. Would have turned out basically the same mess at did post-2001 since this was always a war that couldn't be won on the battlefield.

The Taliban hadn't even taken over Afghanistan yet (this was more or less accomplished in 1996).

So, invasion of Afghanistan, even if that's during his second term or his successor's. In any case, denying al-Qaeda a base of operations would make it a major staging ground for the War on Terror whether that's during the lawlessness of the Afghan Civil War or after the takeover of the Taliban.

The War on Terror was to a certain segment of Washington that was very much there in the 1990s an opportunity to preemptively contain challengers to US power (even then, despite their turmoil, strategists pointed to Russia and China) and cross "rogue states" off the hit list to reinforce US hegemony. It was always going to implicate Afghanistan and Iraq, and if the neocons had been so emboldened, Iran and Syria. Maybe you could argue that it would take a Republican administration to get that agenda through, but as OTL, the Democrats would be under intense pressure to toe the line. But since Afghanistan had literally been a base for multinational Islamic extremists since the 1980s, even taking away the broader geopolitical reasons for establishing influence there, it would be a very logical target. If the US starts going after terrorism, it's very hard to find a reason why they don't go into Afghanistan.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 26, 2021, 10:24:41 PM »

The Blind Sheikh Omar Rahman would've been summarily executed right there in Jersey City.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,611
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2021, 01:14:10 PM »

Pretty sure Bin Laden was not involved in the 1993 attack.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2021, 07:12:06 PM »

Pretty sure Bin Laden was not involved in the 1993 attack.

It's actually unclear to this day how much he was, especially considering that the US government had very little knowledge of him (let alone, al-Qaeda) at the time. To the extent that he was known to US officials in the mid-90s, it was as a "financier" of terrorism, a designation which both a) misunderstood the al-Qaeda organization and bin Laden's central leadership within it and b) was based on the flawed notion that bin Laden was personally financing international terrorism with his family fortune rather than organizing and approving terrorist plots himself with the financial backing of other donors (primarily based in the Gulf countries of course). Remember, Osama's access to his slice of the family inheritance had been frozen by the Saudi government sometime in the early 90s because of his persistent public condemnations of the royal family.

We do know that some of the people who were involved in the WTC bombing trained at camps run by bin Laden and/or his associates, and that the Blind Sheikh Omar Rahman was a close bin Laden ally. Also, Ramzi Yousef's uncle was none other than Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the operational mastermind of the 9/11 plot - although it should be noted that KSM never actually pledged allegiance to bin Laden, maintaining his independence...
Logged
wangaratta
Rookie
**
Posts: 27
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2024, 02:24:50 AM »

Clinton wouldn't have invaded Iraq, but Afghanistan for sure. Would have turned out basically the same mess at did post-2001 since this was always a war that couldn't be won on the battlefield.

The British defeated the Malayan communists. The Sri Lankans defeated the Tamil Tigers. The US defeated the Baathists and then ISIS. It has been true only when the insurgents have a safe haven where they can't be touched, as the VC did in North Vietnam and the Taliban did in Pakistan.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2024, 02:55:17 AM »
« Edited: January 17, 2024, 03:43:50 AM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

Luckily they had out of date blueprints that didn't show the extra support that was added. And so they didn't kill many people despite much better timing than 9/11.

9/11 would have been much worse had it been when the stock market was open rather than both attacks before it opened and 1 before 9. And deaths wouldn't have scaled linearly.  If there are 20k-25k in each tower instead of the 7k-8k that were there, the staircases would have been really clogged. So instead of killing maybe 20% of 15k, they might kill 40% of 40k+, so several times the deaths. Each tower should have had 6 staircases, but the Port Authority exempted itself from regulations and built only 3.
Logged
wangaratta
Rookie
**
Posts: 27
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2024, 08:03:01 PM »

The 80 elevator mechanics on 9/11 were rightly torn to pieces by the trade publications in the elevator industry for their cowardice and betrayal of those who were trapped and could have survived. They all ran away to a man. We know of at least one man who escaped from a elevator with closed doors in the WTC1 lobby on his own - how many more like him could have been still alive?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 12 queries.