English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Or John Kerry would have been in office when 9/11 happened.


Personally, I don't think Clinton who have done things too different than Bush has done.

2006-12-11 10:37:18 · 16 answers · asked by #1 "Abuela" 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Remember, be HONEST and, also important to remember......

NO other President in history has EVER had to deal with ALL ( 9/11 and Natural disasters) this one has.

How would Gore or Kerry dealt with it ALL.

2006-12-11 10:45:13 · update #1

16 answers

truth seeker is a dumbass


The list of Democrats that agreed with Bush re: the WMD's included over half of the Democrat Senators, the British Intelligence agencies, the French Intelligence Agencies, the Italian Intelligence agencies, the Russian Intelligence agencies, the Bulgarian Intelligence agencies, the Czech Intelligence agencies, the Israeli Intelligence agencies, the Spanish Intelligence agencies, etc..

Along those who agreed with Bush were Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Robert Byrd, Jay Rockefeller and many more.

2006-12-11 10:46:16 · answer #1 · answered by hume_10 2 · 3 1

This one is going to get me my share of "thumbs down" because evidently no one wants to hear the truth. Just like when I said 2/3 of illegals pay taxes.

We still would have gone to war in Afghanistan. There is NO president Democrat or Republican who wouldn't go after the people responsible for a tragedy of that magnitude (and ANYONE who says otherwise is incredibly ignorant and needs to study American history and the political after effects of full scale attacks on America). However, all subsequent events would not have happened. We would not have gone after Saddam after dubiously connecting him with Al-Qaeda. We would not have gone to war with a country that posed no immediate threat. We would not have increased the number of terrorist recruits exponentially by the unnecessary war in Iraq. We would not have isolated ourselves from the rest of the world, who now sees our elected leader as a cowboy. We would not have thrown a country into civil war. We would not have caused the potential increased destabilization of an entire region (that has historically already had enough problems without our meddling). We would not have lost the lives of nearly 3000 American servicemen and women in an unnecessary war. (As for those who talk about the Senators that voted for the resolution think about the fact that if Gore or Kerry were president they wouldn't have asked the day after 9-11 "What do we have on Iraq?" even though Al-Qaeda had already taken responsibility for the attack. This president wanted a war with Iraq even though he KNEW they were not responsible for 9-11. )

As for the natural disasters; Gore or Kerry would not have hired one of their buddies with little large scale crisis management to be the head of FEMA. So Katrina would have been handled more effectively.

I hope this answers your hypothetical question.

2006-12-11 11:10:20 · answer #2 · answered by Mrs. Bass 7 · 1 2

Questions like this are kind of dumb to be honest. We can all speculate till the cows come home but nobody knows what would have happened if anybody other than "W" was in charge. I will tell you this...the notion that Gore or Kerry would have shrank from the responsibilities of responding to an attack on the United States after 9/11 is bullsh*t! Every American elected President...no matter who he/she is, was, or may be...has risen to the challenge of our country under attack!

2006-12-11 10:45:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Katrina wasn't brought about by employing international warming. It replaced into brought about by employing heat spots interior the sea from the present peeling off around Florida deliver heat water rings into the gulf. Katrina Hit 2 of those rings and it made it plenty extra helpful..

2016-12-30 06:59:42 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Clinton would have lobbed more missles at tents & maybe hit a few camels. Gore would have been cringing under his desk. Kerry would have waited for permission from the UN before doing anything.

2006-12-11 11:07:54 · answer #5 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 2 2

There is NO reason to believe that anyone in the position of President would have done anything different than Bush immediately following 9-11. There IS reason to believe that no other person in the position of President would have lied to the American people to start a war in Iraq.

2006-12-11 10:44:14 · answer #6 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 1 4

If Al Gore or John Kerry were in charge during 9/11 we'd be Butt
deep in rubble!

Thank you very much, while you're up!!!

2006-12-11 10:42:39 · answer #7 · answered by producer_vortex 6 · 4 3

It depends on what you believe. Its hard to answer hypothetical questions about the past with any degree of accuracy because you dont know what affect those happenings wouldve had on the rest of the world.

2006-12-11 10:46:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

They'd have formed a study group with France and put the UN in charge because we all know that Kofi Anan is such an honest man and a true world leader.

2006-12-11 11:19:41 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 1 2

I do not think that any recent presidential candidate would have been able to completely fix the problem that 9/11 revealed, but i think they MIGHT have done a better job seeing as George dubya bush has done a pretty bad job.

2006-12-11 10:40:37 · answer #10 · answered by smartass 3 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers