Would Gore have invaded Iraq?

[Јas]

Assuming the following:

• Gore succeeds Clinton as President in 2000
• 9/11 happens as per real life

Do you think America would still have launched an invasion of Iraq?
Why/why not?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Of course not.

Sadly, Bush would then defeat Gore in a landslide in 2004, with the slogan "9/11 wouldn't have happened under my watch".  Bush would then invade Iraq.

[Friz]

Of course not.

Sadly, Bush would then defeat Gore in a landslide in 2004, with the slogan "9/11 wouldn't have happened under my watch".  Bush would then invade Iraq.

[Nym90]

No, and Gore would've won easy reelection in 2004 as the Republicans would've criticized him and Clinton over 9/11 mercilessly and been rightfully portrayed as "batsh*t crazy" as jfern would say.

[minionofmidas]

Absolutely not. 9/11 and Iraq are unrelated events.

[Јas]

Absolutely not. 9/11 and Iraq are unrelated events.

Yeah, I'd agree.

I was interested in asking after seeing some of the comments in the other thread [the what if re: Gore and 9/11] to see just how many would answer yes and why.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He would probably have bombed it at some point, but that isn't the same thing.

[David S]

Probably not, but I'm sure Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik and Ron Paul would not have invaded.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

He would probably have bombed it at some point, but that isn't the same thing.

Yeah; he would pretty much continue the Clinton Policy.

Tbh I'm more interested in what President Gore would have done differently in Afghanistan.

[Lief 🗽]

Of course not.

Sadly, Bush would then defeat Gore in a landslide in 2004, with the slogan "9/11 wouldn't have happened under my watch".  Bush would then invade Iraq.

[Padfoot]

Of course he wouldn't have.  One thing I think could have happened is that Gore might have gone after Pakistan.  The Afghan-Pakistan border is a hotbed of terrorist hideouts and I don't see how one could effectively quash terrorism in Afghanistan without controlling this area fully.

[Erc]

Of course not.  The real question is how does he handle affairs in the year after 9/11.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq post-9/11, and he'd have probably lost seats in the midterm because of it.

[Padfoot]

Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq post-9/11, and he'd have probably lost seats in the midterm because of it.

Why??  No one even cared about Iraq until the Bush administration began talking about it.  It doesn't make any sense for Gore to loose seats.  He'd probably gain a few seats by invading Afghanistan, just like Bush did.  Without Bush Iraq becomes virtually a non-issue.

[??????????]

Maybe not, but I still think we would have gone in there eventually anyhow to finish the job that was left undone in '91.

[Sensei]

Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq post-9/11, and he'd have probably lost seats in the midterm because of it.

[Verily]

Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq post-9/11, and he'd have probably lost seats in the midterm because of it.

See, this is stupid. No one cared about Iraq. No one thought about it. No one was saying "Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11" until Bush said it. There was no "Axis of Evil" until Bush said it.

You're looking at it from the perspective of today, thinking that Iraq was somehow relevant in late 2001. It wasn't.

[Friz]

Of course Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq.  Saddam didn't threaten HIS daddy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Of course not. To believe that you'd have to be complete braindead f**king moron like Ralph Nader (who claims that)

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Of course not. To believe that you'd have to be complete braindead f**king moron like Ralph Nader (who claims that)

Really Doubt that. I admit that Gore may not have invaded Iraq but let's forgot that Clinton's relationship with Iraq was hardly Cordial.. The Sanctions, The continous bombing, enforcement of the no-fly zone and Operation Desert Fox. I've no doubt if Gore became President he would use 9\11 as leverage against 'hostile' islamic regimes. But I doubt he would have gone all the way like Bush did.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I continue to be of the opinion that current events in Iraq are but one act in a rather tasteless drama that began several decades ago.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Of course not. To believe that you'd have to be complete braindead f**king moron like Ralph Nader (who claims that)

Really Doubt that. I admit that Gore may not have invaded Iraq but let's forgot that Clinton's relationship with Iraq was hardly Cordial.. The Sanctions, The continous bombing, enforcement of the no-fly zone and Operation Desert Fox. I've no doubt if Gore became President he would use 9\11 as leverage against 'hostile' islamic regimes. But I doubt he would have gone all the way like Bush did.

Iraq was not an Islamic regime, and Gore was critical of the invasion since before it began. He was opposed since day one. Sure Clinton wasn't friendly with Saddam, but who would be? There's no indication Gore would've actually invaded Iraq.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Of course not. To believe that you'd have to be complete braindead f**king moron like Ralph Nader (who claims that)

Really Doubt that. I admit that Gore may not have invaded Iraq but let's forgot that Clinton's relationship with Iraq was hardly Cordial.. The Sanctions, The continous bombing, enforcement of the no-fly zone and Operation Desert Fox. I've no doubt if Gore became President he would use 9\11 as leverage against 'hostile' islamic regimes. But I doubt he would have gone all the way like Bush did.

Iraq was not an Islamic regime, and Gore was critical of the invasion since before it began. He was opposed since day one. Sure Clinton wasn't friendly with Saddam, but who would be? There's no indication Gore would've actually invaded Iraq.

To say Clinton wasn't 'friendly' with Saddam is a massive understatement. He continued the UN sanctions (which only helped the regime as it made the populace more dependant on it) and not to mention that he seemed to bomb it into the stone age on a couple of occasions for dubious reasons (though not as dubious as bombing that Medicine factory in Sudan in order to distract media attention from that Lewinsky witchhunt nonsense.)

I tend to agree with Al, Iraq history begins with the end of Ottoman Empire (That last word appears too much in the history of Iraq) and decision of the British and the French with some assistance from the major warlord in the region, Ibn Saud (later the founder of the Saudi Dynasty) to split up the old non-Turkish Ottoman provinces.. any bloody way they wanted without any consideration for what the "damn natives" may think - actually iirc Iraq was a Winston Churchill initative. If anything the decision to unite those three ex-Ottoman provinces in Iraq was done in order to divide the populace as to make British Rule easier. Straight out of the Imperialist playbook - guess who has done something similiar recently?

Which goes to show that Empires are never a good idea.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Just bombing and firing cruise missiles is way different from what Bush did.

And as I said, Gore was critical of it since the beginning.