What IF: 9/11 Hadn't Happened?

[germanos]

Originally posted by Patroklos


That was a reason for going in, for those of us who bothered to listen to the actual speeches and not the snipets on the news.

But probably not the only (possibly even a minor) reason:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/25/60minutes/main2728375_page4.shtml

The truth of Iraq begins, according to Tenet, the day after the attack of Sept. 11, when he ran into Pentagon advisor Richard Perle at the White House.

"He said to me, 'Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday, they bear responsibility.' It’s September the 12th. I’ve got the manifest with me that tell me al Qaeda did this. Nothing in my head that says there is any Iraqi involvement in this in any way shape or form and I remember thinking to myself, as I'm about to go brief the president, 'What the hell is he talking about?'" Tenet remembers.

"You said Iraq made no sense to you in that moment. Does it make any sense to you today?" Pelley asks.

"In terms of complicity with 9/11, absolutely none," Tenet says. "It never made any sense. We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America. Period."

"The president, in October of 2002, quote: 'We need to think about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his dirty work.' Is that what you're telling the president?" Pelley asks.

"Well, we didn't believe al Qaeda was gonna do Saddam Hussein's dirty work," Tenet says.

"January '03, the president again, [said] quote: 'Imagine those 19 hijackers this time armed by Saddam Hussein.' Is that what you're telling the president?" Pelley asks.

"No," Tenet says.

The vice president upped the ante, claiming Saddam had nuclear weapons, when the CIA was saying he didn’t.

"What's happening here?" Pelley asks.

"Well, I don't know what's happening here," Tenet says. "The intelligence community's judgment is 'He will not have a nuclear weapon until the year 2007, 2009.'"

[lord of the mark]

Dont we have enough Iraq debates, and George Bush debates, on the OT?

Lets try to discuss history here, not current events. I wont go so far as to suggest pre-disco era (the SHWI rule for political topics) but Id say anything since the fall of the USSR (December 1991 or so) is too recent to be "history". Gulf War 1, yes, George HW Bush yes, the '89, yes, but Clinton no, Dubya no, Tony Blair no, Russia under Yeltsin (as in independent state rather than an SSR) no.

Mandatory on topic material

Is there really any proof that Europeans used to say that anything since Waterloo was "current events"?

Did Chou En Lai really say, when asked about the effect of the French Revolution "its too soon to say" ?

[germanos]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Dont we have enough Iraq debates, and George Bush debates, on the OT?

The question was: what if 9/11 hadn't happened.

Your claim on what's history and what's not is quite proposterous.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by germanos


The question was: what if 9/11 hadn't happened..

That was the question indeed, and it degenerated into a debate about George Tenet, the Iraq war, the Bush administration, and other things that have been debated ad nauseum in OT, as it inevitably would.


Where would you draw the line between history and current events?

[germanos]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Where would you draw the line between history and current events?

I'm not sure.

But if you find a thread on 9/11 to recent, why don't you just stay out of it? This forum isn't exactly spammed with 'recent history' at the moment, so I don't see the problem.

That said, I think an event of six years ago can certainly be viewed in a historic context. The link I provided with the interview of Tenet on CBS (in confluence with the book he is publishing) will be one of the first and probably one of the major historic sources for years to come.

I did question if I should post this 'news' in the OT, but I deliberately choose to post it in this thread, where it seemed more appropriate given the OP and Patroklos' response.

I'm sorry if I irred you.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by germanos


I'm not sure.

But if you find a thread on 9/11 to recent, why don't you just stay out of it? This forum isn't exactly spammed with 'recent history' at the moment, so I don't see the problem.

That said, I think an event of six years ago can certainly be viewed in a historic context. The link I provided with the interview of Tenet on CBS (in confluence with the book he is publishing) will be one of the first and probably one of the major historic sources for years to come.

I did question if I should post this 'news' in the OT, but I deliberately choose to post it in this thread, where it seemed more appropriate given the OP and Patroklos' response.

I'm sorry if I irred you.

The OP was a pretty good example of whats wrong with this sort of thing. Basically a political rant about evil neocons, etc, etc.

OTOH threads about WW2 have degenerated pretty quickly here as well. And and some pretty decent thread ideas have been pretty much ignored.

I was one of the supporters of a history forum, but I now think it was a mistake. Give it a merciful death, and move this stuff back to OT.

[Patroklos]

who still hasn't figured out that there weren't any evidence of WMD and Iraqi government did comply with the inspectors right before the invasion, like the weapons inspector team said.

As I said before the war, WMDs are not why I supported war, it was the FACT that Iraq never fully complied with UN weapons inspection mandates that were a requirement of the Gulf War cease fire. He didn't do it for a decade, I would have been okay with war to force this point from 92 on. That doesn't mean invasion/occupation btw. In my hierarchy there are several things more important that we went to war for than WMDs he might have had (did I ever say otherwise?).

Nice try though, where have I maintained Iraq had WMDs? Especially after the invasion?

When did Iraq ever fully comply with weapons inspectors? Never.

When was the last time I even participated let alone took the position you think I had in an Iraqi WMD threat for tha matter? Two, three years?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Odin
destruction of the middle class via outsourcing.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I wont go so far as to suggest pre-disco era

What if there was no disco ?

The horror ! The horror !

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by molly bloom


What if there was no disco ?

The horror ! The horror !

THAT would be a decent what if.

I dont know enough about the music disco evolved out of to know if theres a plausible POD that prevents disco though. Any ideas?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Patroklos


That was a reason for going in, for those of us who bothered to listen to the actual speeches and not the snipets on the news.

Saddam broke down and invited the inspectors back in but Iraq got invaded anyway.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by VJ

yeah, and then there were those of us who looked at the evidence behind those speeches, ie. actions behind the words...

Did you know that all of the USA's supposed "rock-solid", "slam dunk" evidence of Iraq's existing WMD's were proven to be forgeries within 80 hours of their presentation in the UN?

But that didn't matter now did it, because some people were too busy proclaiming the superiority of their cause because they had loyally listened to lie-filled speeches in full instead of just their compilations.

Upcoming: Vicious ad hominem from Patroklos, who still hasn't figured out that there weren't any evidence of WMD and Iraqi government did comply with the inspectors right before the invasion, like the weapons inspector team said. Oh Patro, what would we do in these Iraq threads without you There would be a consensus of reality, and that would be dreadfully boring because it'd give us an opportunity to look forward instead of bickering over what has happened in the past.

forgeries? source?

[Patroklos]

Saddam broke down and invited the inspectors back in but Iraq got invaded anyway.

He alowed them in many times over the previous 10 years, and changed his mind, and changed his mind again.

During none of those times, including the last, were the inspectors given unfettered access EVERYWHERE they wanted to go, when they wanted to go.

[Ecthy]

If 9/11 hadn't happened Patroklos here would be unemployed.

[Patroklos]

Not so much, I signed up for four years, they aren't going to let me get away that easy.

I probably wouldn't be looking a 8 months in Afghanistant though, third deployment in as many years. We shall see.