Don't know what they would have done because they weren't in office. It is hard to guess, because everyone is different. It would be easy for me to say that they would have handled it the "right way", but how do I know that? They might have done the exact same thing (but I doubt it - they had no beef with Iraq or the leader to create the lie so they could invade and start a war), and then again, they might have done something completely different. We don't know, and we will never know.
One must also look at if Al Gore or John Kerry were in office, then Al Qeada might not have attacked. On more than one occasion, terrorists have done things like that to "slap the current administration in the face", so to speak. Remember the hostages that were held in Iran all those years ago? They were held until the presidency changed hands, just to prove a point to the outgoing administration. OBL might have been doing something like that to Bush. We will never know, will we?
2006-09-09 18:42:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Im sure some sort of retaliations would have occured, but Im thinkin that the huge leaps, and illogical tactics might have been less if either Gore or Kerry were at the helm. Im pretty sure that those administrations would have let the military do its tactical jobs rather than mess with everything the way they have. SO many retired military have spoken out about how ludicrous this administration has been about this. I do think that having a president with a real military background would have been better, although I personally would NOT have supported the war in any case. I bet the body count would have been lower though.
2006-09-09 18:43:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by prancingmonkey 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Of course 9/11 would have still happened! But Gore or Kerry, being the democrats that they are, would have wanted to talk about it with the terrorists over a nice cup of herbal tea. Then the USA would have gotten its a** blown up and we would not be here today! Bush didn't take any s**t from these terrorists and thats why we are fighting them right now!
2006-09-09 19:57:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by mattbabq 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Al Gore would have got his facts first, and then retaliated in kind against those whom he could prove were responsible...Saudi Arabia included, but more of an economic embargo there, regardless of the oil they have.
He would have increased security in our ports and in our airports and on our borders, effectively...not as Dubya has given lip service to.
He would not have attacked Iraq unless Iraq clearly attacked America. George W. Bush was planning to attack Iraq long before 9/11.
Gore is intelligent and clear-thinking, something Bush has not...Bush is a bumbling tool of the oil companies, and is the worst president this country has had...bar none.
Sadam had asked the U.N. to allow him to go into asylum in a country if he were not prosecuted for crimes against humanity by the U.N. In return the U.N. would be allowed to send troops into Iraq and keep peace until free elections could be held. Before such a deal could be effected, Dubya attacked Iraq anyhow, knowing it was not necessary.
Dubya has made a debtor nation of us, and unilaterally cut back or deleted needed governmental programs in order to try and come up with the $billion plus per week this little fiasco of his is costing...not to mention the thousands of our soldiers killed and the many tens of thousands maimed and mutilated. This does not even consider the 100,000 plus innocent Iraqi citizens killed by the unnecessary tribute to George W. Bush.
Kerry would have given us more of the same as Bush is giving us...another fool seeking glorification of his name.
Andy's answer proves the institutionalized insane have access to computers...the man is stark-raving mad!!!
2006-09-09 19:57:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Slewpy D 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Do you think it would of happened if Gore was in? It would of if Kerry was in. You DO know that Kerry and Bush are cousins right? Oh, you also know that they are both part of the Skull and Bones satanic cult right? Oh you don't? Time to wake up then I guess.
2006-09-09 19:01:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by chadman 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well, for one thing we wouldn't be in Iraq right now. Osama would have been the target, and we wouldn't have had troops diverted to Iraq on a whim. The economy wouldn't be falsely manipulated. Katrina states wouldn't look like it does today. 9/11 may have never even happened. JMHO.
2006-09-09 19:44:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Schona 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
This one is going to get me my proportion of "thumbs down" because of the fact for sure no person desires to take heed to the actuality. basically like as quickly as I stated 2/3 of illegals pay taxes. We nonetheless could have long previous to conflict in Afghanistan. there's no president Democrat or Republican who does no longer bypass after the folk in charge for a tragedy of that fee (and anybody who says in any different case is rather ignorant and needs to income American history and the political after effects of finished scale assaults on united states of america of america). notwithstanding, all next activities does no longer have got here approximately. we does no longer have long previous after Saddam after dubiously connecting him with Al-Qaeda. we does no longer have long previous to conflict with a rustic that posed no instant possibility. we does no longer have extra suitable the style of terrorist recruits exponentially with the help of the pointless conflict in Iraq. we does no longer have remoted ourselves from something of the worldwide, who now sees our elected chief as a cowboy. we does no longer have thrown a rustic into civil conflict. we does no longer have brought about the aptitude extra suitable destabilization of a finished area (that has traditionally already had adequate problems with out our meddling). we does no longer have lost the lives of almost 3000 American servicemen and ladies in an pointless conflict. (As for people who talk on the subject of the Senators that voted for the determination think of on the subject of the undeniable fact that if Gore or Kerry have been president they does no longer have asked the day after 9-11 "What can we've on Iraq?" even nonetheless Al-Qaeda had already taken accountability for the attack. This president wanted a conflict with Iraq even nonetheless he KNEW they weren't in charge for 9-11. ) As for the organic mess ups; Gore or Kerry does no longer have employed one in each of their friends with little super scale disaster administration to be the top of FEMA. So Katrina could have been dealt with extra efficiently. i'm hoping this solutions your hypothetical question.
2016-12-18 07:52:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gone after the REAL people behind 9/11, we would have Osama and would have never gone into Iraq. So a lot better than it did with Dubya.
2006-09-09 19:05:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by The Prez. 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
They would have SURRENDERED to the Enemy, put the US military at the disposal of Al Qaida, and forced at gunpoint every American to convert to Islam, change his or her name to Mohammed (or Fatima), grow a beard and wear white robes and a beanie (or a burka).
2006-09-09 18:58:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
9/11 would have happened, but as an ordinary day, since they wouldn't have orchestrated "another Purl Harbor" like the Bush government did.
Or maybe you don't know that they killed 4000 of our own people for money and power?
2006-09-09 18:49:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋