democrats: how do you think al gore would have handled the attacks of 9-11-01?

Question

please be specific, no rhetoric.

Answer 1

I'm not a Democrat but I'll answer anyway.

He would have spent 6 months cowering under his desk. He would then have spent another 6 months asking the UN for permission. By this time there would have been more attacks sending him back under his desk & the cycle would have repeated.

Answer 2

He would have done the same thing Bush did. Attack the Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan, where the attacks were planned, where they were hiding,and then he would have kept after them until they were all dead, dead, dead. He would not have diverted to Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11. Since he lost to the Supreme Court, Bush became President and has now let the Taliban rebuild, and Bin Laden is still out there, somewhere, and strong as ever. North Korea is now thumbing their noses at us, as is Iran, Syria, Russia, France, Venezuela, etc. And Bush thinks sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq will fix it all?!!!!!
Oh, by the way, I'm not a Democrat, JUST a concerned citizen.

Answer 3

He would have handled the initial aftermath much the same as Bush. I think any President would have reacted similarly in the days following 9/11. Shown the American people visible leadership, shared his outrage and grief while keeping a stiff upper lip and immediately set out to attack the Al Queda strongholds in Afghanistan, and hopefully continued in that vein until we had a real grip on terrorism and the Taliban. I don't think he would have responded to another situation in the world that was not an imminent threat before wholly dealing with Al Queda. I think he would have made more of an effort to reach out to our Allies to join us in the fight against terrorism itself and not a different war. The whole world was mourning with us - I think Al Gore would have been a real force in working with other countries to help us all defeat terrorism.

Answer 4

He never would have allowed it to happen. Sheeple People who refuse to accept the fact that the Bush administration Orchestrated the Terror Attacks of 911 are just plain ignorant. It's impossible for Jet fuel or Kerosene to melt iron...LOOK AT THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS. Also if the floors collapsed causing a chain reaction it would have taken well over 90 seconds for the buildings to come down. They came down at free fall speed....9 seconds. There is no logical argument here. Explosives were pre-planted in the building. Case closed! Why are so many people having a hard time accepting this?

Answer 5

Al Gore would do the same as Bush, because politics on oil always the same. The attacks of 9-11-01? you still think that just a few hijackers can fight with US? don't be silly!

Answer 6

How do we know 911 would have even occurred in the first place? Clinton set up a good anti-terrorism network that Gore more than likely would have kept in place. It's quite possible that 911 might have been prevented by this network.

A lower of number of troops would have been sent to Afghanistan to take care of the Taliban and they would have been aided by the Northern Alliance and coaltion troops.

The important difference would have been after the Taliban were forced out. I imagine Gore might have done what Clinton had done for Central America after Hurricane Mitch by sending in both active and reserve engineer and medical units to help build up the infrastructure and give medical aid to the people.

Such actions might have done more to gear the people to resisting the Taliban and would have made the US look more positive in the world's eye.

Answer 7

For starters, Al Gore would have prevented the attacks by requiring commercial airlines to secure their cockpit doors. The republican congress blocked him, placing a few dollars more profit for the airline lobby ahead of national security.

It's all in the Gore Commission on Airline Safety and National Security Report c. 1998.

Answer 8

911 would not have happend because, unlike the Bush Circus, he would've counter attacked al-qaeda to prevent further attacks on america.

Answer 9

same way Clinton would have...kept US troops en mass and used air power to strike...and he would have never put troops into Iraq, the air policy was working...the best thing to do is use our navy and air forces....the threat of invasion is sometimes better than the actual use...Bush has no tactical/strategic subtlety

Answer 10

I believe he would have immediately go up and left that first-grade classroom.

I don't think he would have immediately attacked Iraq, which would have been a good thing considering there was no connection with Al Qaeda and no WMDs.

Answer 11

He would have his army in Afghanistan trying to find Osama instead of coaching a civil war in iraq.