Gore’s presidency would have been a continuation of Clinton’s, who were aware of the threat potential posed by al-Qaeda. So if/when the now infamous Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US memo landed on his desk on August 6th, 2001 - or the even earlier “UBL [Usama Bin Laden] Threats Are Real" memos from months earlier; they would have been taken seriously and acted upon.
Instead Bush’s response was to fob it off disinterestedly, saying: “All right. You’ve covered your ass”
So yes, learning from earlier failings - a theoretical Gore presidency would have taken these threats much more seriously, and could have prevented the thousands of deaths of 9/11, and tens of thousands of deaths in the subsequent wars.
So if/when the now infamous Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US memo landed on his desk on August 6th, 2001 - or the even earlier “UBL [Usama Bin Laden] Threats Are Real" memos from months earlier; they would have been taken seriously and acted upon.
Acted to do what? Implement TSA in January of 2001? Create DHS inside the first 100 days? Put air marshals on planes by June?
Intelligence knew about the pending attacks, but had no real way to interface with airport security. That was the root of the problem. And nobody was going to solve it until after 9/11 because Congress would not have taken this any more seriously than they took it during Blowjob Gate, when Al Qaeda was taking pot shots at the USS Cole.
The president has quite a bit of ability to set priorities and work assignments within the justice dept and intelligence agencies and other parts of the executive branch. Unlike legislative things, he really can just say “put 1,000 people on this Bin Laden thing” one day and just from that they just go off and do it exactly like he said.
Bush did pretty much the exact opposite, actively refusing to use his leadership position to instruct the people who worked for him to do anything about the threat that they were telling him existed. Idk if anything Gore did would have made a difference, but there definitely is a consensus that Bush fucked up on recognizing and reacting, in retrospect.
The president has quite a bit of ability to set priorities and funding levels and work assignments within the justice dept and intelligence agencies.
If he’s a Republican, sure.
But Democrats always have their hands tied.
Bush did pretty much the exact opposite, actively refusing to use his leadership position to instruct the people who worked for him to do anything about the threat that they were telling him existed.
Bush was fixated, laser-like, on Iraq and looking for any excuse to invade. The Al Qaeda memos were treated as a distraction.
However, the theory that he just had a big “Stop Al Qaeda” button under his desk and refusee to press it is naive. There’s no real policy Gore could have implemented to stop the 9/11 hijackings that would have come into force between January and September.
At best, he could have brought on a senior staffer who better coordinated between the NSA and the FBI. But even then, you’re assuming the FBI would have been in the right place at the right time to act.
Gore, personally, wasn’t going to do anything to change the outcome.
Kind of like how Clinton stopped the bombing in '93?
Gore’s presidency would have been a continuation of Clinton’s, who were aware of the threat potential posed by al-Qaeda. So if/when the now infamous Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US memo landed on his desk on August 6th, 2001 - or the even earlier “UBL [Usama Bin Laden] Threats Are Real" memos from months earlier; they would have been taken seriously and acted upon.
Instead Bush’s response was to fob it off disinterestedly, saying: “All right. You’ve covered your ass”
So yes, learning from earlier failings - a theoretical Gore presidency would have taken these threats much more seriously, and could have prevented the thousands of deaths of 9/11, and tens of thousands of deaths in the subsequent wars.
Acted to do what? Implement TSA in January of 2001? Create DHS inside the first 100 days? Put air marshals on planes by June?
Intelligence knew about the pending attacks, but had no real way to interface with airport security. That was the root of the problem. And nobody was going to solve it until after 9/11 because Congress would not have taken this any more seriously than they took it during Blowjob Gate, when Al Qaeda was taking pot shots at the USS Cole.
idk bro, but maybe they should have tried something
The president has quite a bit of ability to set priorities and work assignments within the justice dept and intelligence agencies and other parts of the executive branch. Unlike legislative things, he really can just say “put 1,000 people on this Bin Laden thing” one day and just from that they just go off and do it exactly like he said.
Bush did pretty much the exact opposite, actively refusing to use his leadership position to instruct the people who worked for him to do anything about the threat that they were telling him existed. Idk if anything Gore did would have made a difference, but there definitely is a consensus that Bush fucked up on recognizing and reacting, in retrospect.
If he’s a Republican, sure.
But Democrats always have their hands tied.
Bush was fixated, laser-like, on Iraq and looking for any excuse to invade. The Al Qaeda memos were treated as a distraction.
However, the theory that he just had a big “Stop Al Qaeda” button under his desk and refusee to press it is naive. There’s no real policy Gore could have implemented to stop the 9/11 hijackings that would have come into force between January and September.
At best, he could have brought on a senior staffer who better coordinated between the NSA and the FBI. But even then, you’re assuming the FBI would have been in the right place at the right time to act.
Gore, personally, wasn’t going to do anything to change the outcome.