U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2013, 05:16 PM
 
5,765 posts, read 10,753,826 times
Reputation: 3845

Advertisements

The February 26, 1993 explosion in level B-2 of the north tower's underground parking garage killed six people and exposed over 1,000 to heavy smoke and fumes, but that was far short of what seems to have been the goal.

According to some sources, the bombers hoped that their explosives-packed truck would produce enough of a blast to destroy the north tower's structural supports, causing it to topple sideways - either into the adjacent tower, or into a surrounding part of lower Manhattan.

Since the attack took place after noon, most workers had already arrived and were in the buildings - had the north tower fallen, it would have killed almost 30,000 within the tower itself, and probably several more thousand on the ground. Nearby subway lines may have flooded due to seawall collapse, drowning or electrocuting thousands more.

How would the America of February 1993 - one month into the Clinton administration and only a couple years after the breakup of the USSR - have reacted to this? What would have been the military component of our response?

It was a shocking event at the time, but had it gone according "to plan," our history would have been quite a bit different.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 09-01-2013, 05:58 PM
 
16 posts, read 20,390 times
Reputation: 20
I'm not sure how different the response would have been.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,571 posts, read 20,556,297 times
Reputation: 20991
I doubt that President Clinton would have decided that the answer was invading Iraq.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 09:40 AM
 
Location: Here.
15,454 posts, read 14,066,493 times
Reputation: 18082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
I doubt that President Clinton would have decided that the answer was invading Iraq.
Was the answer invading Bosnia?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,571 posts, read 20,556,297 times
Reputation: 20991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
Was the answer invading Bosnia?
That makes no sense in the context of the OP's question.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Here.
15,454 posts, read 14,066,493 times
Reputation: 18082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
That makes no sense in the context of the OP's question.
And Clinton invading Iraq was?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,571 posts, read 20,556,297 times
Reputation: 20991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
And Clinton invading Iraq was?
Of course. The response to the successful attack on the WTC by President Bush's administration was to invade Iraq. Clinton would have been president when the hypothetical successful attack took place in 1993..and not behaved in the same manner as Bush.

Bosnia has nothing at all to do with any of this. You seem to think that some response denigrating Clinton was required even if it bore no relation to the OP's hypothetical question.

It was not.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 06:30 PM
 
48,508 posts, read 88,633,133 times
Reputation: 18188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
I doubt that President Clinton would have decided that the answer was invading Iraq.
No he would have done just what he did then; decided it wasn't a national security matter but a police matter for new NYPD to handle as a crime. Boy; now wrong he was on that one.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-02-2013, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,571 posts, read 20,556,297 times
Reputation: 20991
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
No he would have done just what he did then; decided it wasn't a national security matter but a police matter for new NYPD to handle as a crime. Boy; now wrong he was on that one.
Well, no, but at least you are on topic.

I think Clinton would have taken it to the UN, gotten some lukewarm resolution of support, and ordered up a limited response on a target which could be construed as Al-Quaida or at least Al-Quaida-ish. We would have used 75 million dollars in cruise missiles wiping out twenty five bucks worth of terrorist camp.

Then Clinton would have gone to New York and greatly raised his popularity with a series of empathy appearances with victims and their relatives. No one could do people empathy like Bill.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 09-03-2013, 09:44 AM
 
Location: Here.
15,454 posts, read 14,066,493 times
Reputation: 18082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Of course. The response to the successful attack on the WTC by President Bush's administration was to invade Iraq. Clinton would have been president when the hypothetical successful attack took place in 1993..and not behaved in the same manner as Bush.

Bosnia has nothing at all to do with any of this. You seem to think that some response denigrating Clinton was required even if it bore no relation to the OP's hypothetical question.

It was not.
How soon you forget. Bush invaded Afghanistan as a result of 9/11. Iraq was invaded for having Weapons of Mass Destruction.

In other words, Bush's invasion of Iraq was as irrelevant to this discussion as Clinton's invasion of Bosnia.

It could also be pointed out that al-Queda was on our side during the Bosnian War and that Clinton going after al-Queda in the Middle East would have complicated our efforts in Bosnia.
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top