It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What would the Bush presidency be like if Sept.11 hadn't happened?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I was just watching the republican convention, listening to George Patacki's introduction to Bush when the thought occured to me. What would the issues be if the Sept.11 attacks never occured?What would have been the major accomplishments of the Bush Presidency. Would he have gone after Sadam Hussien?There would be no war. There would be no Homeland Security Department, No Patriot Act, no increased security. I wonder, would we be better or worse off than we are today.




posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
They would be discussing why it's important to be occupyong whatever country they picked on the "Wheel of War."



posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I will make some guesses.

1. The economy would be in better shape.
911 was psychologically very hard on the Nation. The airlines wouldn't have been decimated for a year or so with the fear of flying.

2. GW Bush would be seen as more of a mental lightweight that i think he is.

3. People might [but this is ONLY a might] have paid more attention to the corrupt corporate favoratism legislation.

4. We might re-think (downsize/restructure) our defense and intelligence departments. [which goes to why i think these organizations perpetrated 911 & OK City]

what does anyone else want to guess?
.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 07:33 PM
link   
You could also ask:

1) What if G.W.Bush was never born?
2) What if we had lost WWII?
3) What if space aliens invaded the earth and killed all people 1000 years ago?
4) What if Bill Clinton had been name Richard? (Willie or Dick?) haha

None of the above happened, and what you ask never happened. So, your question has no value and no purpose.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 09:19 PM
link   
It is the ability of our species to imagine and speculate that has made us the devastatingly successful species that we are. People who don't value that forget the inheritance of ideas they have gotten from each previous generation.

We don't all want to be illiterate, rash, unthinking morons like GEORGE W. BUSH.
.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Slank who says we are a successful species? As compared to who? what are you talking about?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 09:53 PM
link   
keyword - devastating

We are 6 billion and growing in population. This is in light of the fact that the species was only about 50 to 100 thousand strong in prehistory. Doesn't that from the most basic standpoint mean successful? We have survived and flourished. Additionally we, for the time being, have the potential to dominate many aspects of the planet.

We are also driving any number of other species to extinction.
We are SO successful, we need to use our minds to think interms of the BIG picture. We should IMO try to sculpt (trim) our species interms of population and environmental impact, to maximize the quality of ourselves and our lives and minimize collateral damage.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 10:13 PM
link   
It's only 5 billion and counting but we, meaning people are so busy trying to pat ourslevs on the back for being the dominant, ie succesful species on earth that we forget, that there are species that have been around much longer, the shark the alligator and the spider come to mind, and long after we are gone the cockroaches will still be here. Much as we hate to admit it it having a big brain does not equate survival.Sometimes the stupid do prevail.Look at politics in general.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 10:34 PM
link   
.
It is true that many species have perservered for incredible lengths of time. It speaks to their robust and/or adaptive designs. I do believe we represent a completely new dynamic in evolution. For us technological abilities have allowed us to move all over the planet, not withstanding the fact that we are essentially Africans suited biologicallly to a tropical climate. In theory, at least, that gives us an ability to adapt to very rapidly changing environments as even short lived bacteria would be hard pressed to match with generational adaptations.
I don't believe any Earth adapted microorganisms would survive on the face of the Moon, but we have managed it for a short period.

I don't want to trumpet our species. That is one of our shortcommings, pride and arrogance, but I do believe judicious use of our intelligence gives us unlimited potential.

(I think the current population of the Earth is about 6.3 billion)

[edit on 3-9-2004 by slank]



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
I cant imagine Bush and no Sept 11
Since he likes being called a "wartime" president, he (they) would have invaded Iraq regardless.
Dont forget, this invasion in Iraq was planned years ahead of time. Is it possible that the Bush administration would have been happy just to lead the country and care for the welfare of its people? Not.
It doesnt match up with the modus operendi the Bush's are known for.
Bush and war go hand in hand.
This is why when Sept 11 happened people were suspicious. This very attack set the backdrop for Bush to invade the country which happen to contain the person the Bush's wanted MOST. Coincidence? There are NO coincidences!
When I'm 99 I will still hold to my belief there was government involvement in this whole horrific affair.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Bush is only a "wartime" president because of 9/11 .Do you really think that anyone wants to start a war? He had to do something! If he had stood back and done nothing the backlash on the US would have been unimaginable. I know you are going to say that the invasion on Iraq had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden, but if you follow the pieces of the puzzel it does. Everything is innertwined where mid east terror is concerned. You can't ignore a boiling pot, Clinton did ,and look what happened. It left the US and the world open to what is going on now!



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeeze louise
Bush is only a "wartime" president because of 9/11 .Do you really think that anyone wants to start a war? He had to do something! If he had stood back and done nothing the backlash on the US would have been unimaginable. I know you are going to say that the invasion on Iraq had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden, but if you follow the pieces of the puzzel it does. Everything is innertwined where mid east terror is concerned. You can't ignore a boiling pot, Clinton did ,and look what happened. It left the US and the world open to what is going on now!


As many of you know, normally I defend Bush (I have also defended Kerry). To say that the invasion of Iraq had to do with Bin Laden MIGHT be a stretch. While an argument can be made that the "possibility" existed that Iraq MIGHT be producing WMD's that could fall into the hands of terrorists, it could never be proven. The US should have kept a close eye on Iraq and found hard evidence the WMD's existed. I'm not suggesting we "ignore a boiling pot", I'm just suggesting more credible evidence and thought should have been put into it.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   
The US government is privy to a lot more information than we will ever know, they know so many things that we will never find out When President Bush first talked about the invasion of Iraq he alluded to the fact that the American people would never know all the facts because it would give the enemy an upper hand, not in those words but (I will look for a link) I continue and will still think that a man like Saddam Hussien with his known history of brutal acts, most of which for his own gain.The world is better off without him and he is still alive. We could have taken him out but I think they want to use him as an example..



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeeze louise
The US government is privy to a lot more information than we will ever know, they know so many things that we will never find out When President Bush first talked about the invasion of Iraq he alluded to the fact that the American people would never know all the facts because it would give the enemy an upper hand, not in those words but (I will look for a link) I continue and will still think that a man like Saddam Hussien with his known history of brutal acts, most of which for his own gain.The world is better off without him and he is still alive. We could have taken him out but I think they want to use him as an example..


You are absolutely right. The world, and more to the point, Iraq (most of it anyway) is a better place without Saddam. I just wish President Bush would have used the WMD's as one of many examples to invade Iraq. Would he really have gotten Congress behind him if he had said "Saddam is a bad guy and the world would be better of without him." If that were the case, there would be many countries that should be invaded (the US also if you ask opinions of others). I know this simplifies things, but I think it has merit.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeeze louise
Bush is only a "wartime" president because of 9/11 .Do you really think that anyone wants to start a war? He had to do something!

yES, bUSH & co. wanted to start a war. This is well documented.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:03 PM
link   
quote by jeeze louise:

The US government is privy to a lot more information than we will ever know, they know so many things that we will never find out When President Bush first talked about the invasion of Iraq he alluded to the fact that the American people would never know all the facts because it would give the enemy an upper hand
What kind of stuff are you guys buying.
1) If we had KNOWN there were no WMDs WHY did we invade?
2) That 'mystic' they know so much more sounds like PURE BS to me. Sounds like the way they sell a $600.00 hammer and a $400.00 toilet seat. [note: toilet is the operative word here, and material that goes in it.]

jeeze louise and dcgolf, I have secret sources from the CIA that tell me the Brooklyn Bridge is for sell, either of you want to buy?
.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
The real question is would 9/11 have happened if there was no Bush presidency.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Do you think the CIA, FBI and US military would have made it happen if George W. Bush wasn't in office?
Oklahoma City did happen on Clinton's watch. Do you think he knew about that?

Have these agencies completely usurped our elected government?
.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Well his ratings were sliding bad before it all happened. What would he have done without that day. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by slank
Do you think the CIA, FBI and US military would have made it happen if George W. Bush wasn't in office?
Oklahoma City did happen on Clinton's watch. Do you think he knew about that?

Have these agencies completely usurped our elected government?
.


National model and its manipulation is far more consistent than the face of the nation. Difference between Alfred P. Murrah building bombing and 9/11 attacks was that government investigated, charged, and tried criminals. Massive questions still remain. 9/11 investigation was utter hogwash, not a single trial and attempts at following profit trail from 9/11 disaster stopped dead.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join