Grumpy

Maybe this reflects my attitude more than Al Gore's, but I'd like to think that he would have seized the post-9/11 goodwill and made a grand Woodrow Wilson gesture and created a new global instrument for combatting the Forces of Evil, or whatever you'd call them (I doubt he'd call them that).

Whereas we now have a US/UK alliance bent on crushing terrorist regimes one at a time, Al Gore's "League of Civilization" or whatever would show that terrorist regimes are up against a much larger foe; that it's no contest. And, where contested, the League would easily prevail -- but not as a conqerer, which is exactly the clash that bin Laden wants to see.

But Majestyk is right. Nobody knows what anybody would have done, and it can't be repeated.

Loren Pechtel

Less tramping of civil liberties but otherwise just about the same. An invasion of Afghanistan was a given after 9/11. No president would have dared not do it.

Pomp

And death squads. There definitely would have been death squads in there somewhere, along with the fervently expressed belief that J. Clifford Baxter's death was not a suicide.

Blixy Sticks

Prior to hitting the bottle harder than he did after having the presidency swiped from him by Bush, he would have soiled and pissed his pants several times over.

Additionally, the pastiness and puffiness of his complexion would have been exacerbated exponentially in unison with the donning of a beard reminiscent of the infamous, polish uni-bomber.

But, alas, the scenario is mere folly. 9/11 would not have occurred if Gore was president. It seems readily apparent that 9/11 was planned well in advance and it has served as a catalyst for everything Bush's administration has done domestically and abroad, henceforth. I am quite certain at this point that 9/11 was planned by Americans, executed by radicals and enabled and facilitated by Americans for a definitive purpose.

NialScorva

Sorta like how no one is giving a second thought to what Gore would have done if Bush had taken office?

HaysooChreesto!

Afghanistan yes. Iraq, maybe. I say maybe about Iraq because I think that Gore would've found the same reasons to invade them as Bush did, but I don't think Gore would've had the spine to withstand the international pressures and dissent that Bush did.
So in the end, I think that Afghanistan would have been the same but the rest of the ME would've remained status quo.
I think that overall there would've been a lot less action on Gore's part.

Joe6Pack

Gore would still be waiting on the Brooking's institute study as to why 9/11 happened.

Blixy Sticks

Oh, so that's a spine, and here I thought it was a hollow cranium.

orac

You mean he'ld try to find out why it happened? That's nonsense.

Next you'll expect us to believe he'ld spend time trying to stop it happening again, instead of invading Iraq.

No normal person would do something so pointless, would they?

orac

I take it you don't take the oil idea seriously, then?

I really don't understand Americans - in America, they're supportive of restrictions on travel from the middle east, but they also want freedom and democracy for those same people they don't want visiting America.

Could you please explain this to me?

Er, Bush wanted us to send people to die in the Iraqi desert. Did you miss that bit?

Before he can ask that of us, he has to persuade us that there's a reason for us to do that.

Plenty of Americans have made the same demand - they want to know why their family members are risking death. We want to know the same thing.

I'm not sure why you find that so unreasonable.

Action is often good, especially when it achieves a pre-specified goal.

So, in exactly what way has Bush's action made America safer? I believe this is a fairly important goal

I'ld like to know what he's done for the rest of the world, too, seeing as he was so keen on us joining him in Iraq to keep making America safer - but for now it will be progress if someone can show me that the US is actually safer. Explaining why Bush went to Belfast to talk about how evil terrorism is would probably be a bit much for most people to do.

• Colour coded false alarms? Has there been an orange alert that was actually followed by a genuine attack on the US? Does knowing there's an alert actually help you in some obvious way?
• Restrictions for Iraqis entering the US even though they're good and noble people who deserve freedom?
• The USA-PATRIOT act (do they have experts to name these things?), which allows greater surveillance of American citizens - even though I thought you were worried about foreigners. What's up with that? Don't you even trust your own people? Still, if the government considers US citizens to be the enemy, it's no wonder they're so paranoid about foreigners.
• A war of aggression in the middle east, which most Arab nations aren't entirely happy with? Given how many of them hate Saddam and will only support fundamentalist islamic governments, it's understandable that they want Saddam gone, but also understandable that they'll never be grateful to the US, no matter what you do in Iraq.
• Telling your allies that their opinions are irrelevant, and that they have to have complete unquestioning support for anything the US does or they'll be considered terrorists themselves?
• Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast

Just how are these things making your nation safer?