Showing posts with label 9/11. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 9/11. Show all posts

Saturday, September 10, 2016

What if 9/11 Didn't Happen?

This year mark the 15th anniversary of 9/11 terrorist attacks. An event that changed the world for many, but for the 2016 Freshmen class, its just history. So as alternate historians, we must ask: what if 9/11 Didn't Happen?

* * *

Matt Mitrovich is the founder and editor of Alternate History Weekly Update, a blogger for Amazing Stories, a volunteer interviewer for SFFWorld and a Sidewise Awards for Alternate History judge. When not exploring alternate timelines he enjoys life with his beautiful wife Alana and prepares for the day when travel between parallel universes becomes a reality. You can follow him on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and YouTube. Learn how you can support his alternate history projects on Patreon.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Check Out William Weber's Strategic Surprise The British Capture of Washington, DC, 1814

Guest post by William Weber.

This month, 24 August to be exact, marks the 200th anniversary of the British capture of Washington, DC.

Strategic Surprise: The British Capture of Washington, DC, 1814 examines the British invasion and the American response. It highlights how British deception shaped American perceptions leading to the capture of the Nation's capital, noting how events could have unfolded differently. It also presents a fictitious warning memorandum written for President Madison, laying out alternative British objectives and capabilities. Having received this information, what would you have done?  

It compliments previous posts to this blog "Rethinking the War of 1812" and "1814: How Washington Was Saved". A more extended treatment of the this issue appears in Neither Victor Nor Vanquished, "Chapter Six: The Battle of Bladensburg: Could Washington Have Been Saved."

Editor's Note: Weber is a little too modest enough to admit his article was also picked up by io9 where it received over 33.000 views.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Review: 43* by Jeff Greenfield

Guest post by Kieran Colfer.
It was a familiar refrain from the political left all the way though the Bush years and ever since: "Everything would be different if only Gore had won the election". There would be no budget deficit, no Iraq War, everyone would still love the USA and we'd be well on our way to solving global warming. There have been many fantasies about this, including even a Saturday Night Live skit by Al Gore himself, but here it finally gets the full book treatment.

Normally the "President Gore" fantasies begin with the election night count itself, but here the author does something a bit cleverer, he moves the butterfly back a year to a little boy being washed up on a Florida beach. As a result, the Florida election turnout is slightly different enough to not need a recount, and so Al Gore returns to the White House as The Man rather then The-Man-In-Waiting. This isn't the only butterfly in the book, however, the second one blows the whole "9/11 was as bad as things can get" idea right out of the water. This particular twist sends subsequent events off on a direction totally different from our timeline - or does it?

The book itself takes a little bit of time to get used to - most alternative history books you read are about events and characters long since consigned to the pages of history, but here you are reading about events that you have lived though (or "would live through" maybe?), so it was slightly strange seeing characters and saying "ah yeah, I remember him".  One nice touch here is in the battle between the recently defeated Republican power players and the newly elected Gore -  a lot of the quotes here will look very familiar, as they are quotes used by the Republicans after Obama won in the 2008 election. For those who look back on the Post-Bush days through rose-tinted glasses and imagine a Gore presidency as a halcyon time of bi-partisan co-operation, this book may come as a rude awakening, but politics was never a gentleman's game, and we see this here in spades.

My one big issue with this book is the ending - in the context of the book itself, it's a good place to end, but it's a bit abrupt, you're left hanging wondering what will happen next. Will a second order counterfactual kick in for Iraq, or wont it? This is a book that begs for a sequel, although it is a clever move by the author to leave the public wanting more.

* * *

Kieran Colfer is a member of the AH Weekly Update Review Team.

Friday, November 2, 2012

Review: 43* by Jeff Greenfield

Guest post by Andrew Schneider.
Few historical events have presented themselves so quickly as fodder for the game of “What If?” as the 2000 U.S. presidential election.  The race between George W. Bush and Al Gore is often oversimplified as having come down to a single vote. Had one Supreme Court justice switched his or her ruling and allowed the vote counting in Florida to continue, the argument goes, Gore would have ultimately carried the state and won the White House.

In his introduction to 43*, political commentator Jeff Greenfield (author of the Sidewise Award nominated Then Everything Changed) observes a Gore win in the Supreme Court wouldn’t have ended the matter. Florida’s Republican-run legislature was prepared to award the state’s votes to Bush in any event.  Instead, Greenfield gives Gore the win by using an earlier point of divergence. He imagines a different outcome to the case of Elián González, the six-year-old Cuban boy rescued from drowning off the coast of Fort Lauderdale on Thanksgiving 1999.

In our world, Elián was the sole survivor of an escape from Cuba involving his mother and her lover.  A prolonged struggle ensued over whether Elián would be returned to his father in Cuba. It ended only in June 2000, when federal agents seized Elián from the home of his Miami relatives. If Florida’s historically Republican-leaning Cuban-American community needed a reason to vote against the Democratic Vice President, they had one now, and they came out in force on Election Day.

Greenfield posits that if Elián’s mother had lived, and her lover had drowned, the last thing she would have wanted would have been to stay in Little Havana with the family of her estranged ex-husband. Had mother and son returned to Cuba of their own accord, he suggests, enough Cuban-Americans would have sat out the 2000 election to give Gore a clean win.

What happens next in this world, though, is anything but the dream scenario that many Gore partisans held to during the eight years George W. Bush occupied the White House. Like Bill Clinton throughout his last six years in office, President Gore is faced with Republican majorities in both houses of Congress.  Gore, lacking his predecessor’s charm or flexibility, finds much of his domestic agenda stymied -- particularly his environmental and clean energy policies.

The crux of 43* is how President Gore would have faced the threat of al Qaeda.  The Clinton Administration took years to come to grips with how serious a danger Osama bin Laden represented. But by the time Bill Clinton left office, his national security team classed bin Laden as the single greatest threat to the security of the United States. Those individuals went to great lengths to try to convince the incoming George W. Bush Administration that this was the case and were ignored.

A President Gore, Greenfield argues, would have taken the threat of bin Laden much more seriously. But Gore’s national security bureaucracy would have been hampered by the same lack of interagency communication that Bush’s did.  The result in 43* is that the 9/11 hijackers still make it into the U.S. undetected. And by having Gore take steps to make air travel more efficient -- steps that George W. Bush ended up taking towards the end of his own time in office – 9/11 turns into an even bigger catastrophe than it was in our own history.

One of the great strengths of 43* is that the author interviewed many individuals who worked closely with Gore and likely would have been part of his transition team, if not his actual administration. Greenfield says in his epilogue that these conversations gave him insight into how Gore would have behaved in office. The results are convincing to anyone who followed Gore as vice president and as a presidential candidate.

What is less than convincing is the degree of influence Greenfield attributes to the neoconservatives over not just the Republican opposition but American public opinion.  In 43*, as in our world, the neoconservatives blame Saddam Hussein for the 9/11 attacks. Soon, the public is clamoring for an invasion of Iraq. President Gore’s determination to keep the focus of US military efforts on Afghanistan and rooting out al Qaeda wind up costing him dearly.

Numerous accounts of the Bush Administration, notably Barton Gellman’s Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency, have debunked the notion that the neocons drove U.S. foreign and security policy going into the Iraq War. The views of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and others gained prominence not because of the neocons themselves but because those views happened to coincide with those of Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It was these two, with their influence over the Bush White House, that led the U.S. to all but abandon the Afghan War and build the dubious case for war with Iraq. Subtract Cheney and Rumsfeld, replace George W. Bush with Al Gore, and the neocons would have had as little influence shaping US policy as they had either under Clinton or under the first President Bush.

It’s tempting to imagine that much of the pain of the past dozen years might have been avoided with a simple change of leadership.  Greenfield’s account reminds us that history is rarely that simple. But it’s possible to overdo things. Trying to argue that the Iraq War was as unavoidable for a President Gore as deeper involvement in the Vietnam War was for, say, a President Kennedy who survived assassination in 1963, is perhaps a step too far. Greenfield’s reluctance to stray too far from the script of our own history is perhaps the greatest weakness of 43*.

Had Al Gore actually won the presidency in 2000, he would now have been out of power for only four to eight years. A more plausible account of a Gore presidency will require some greater distance on events for reflection.

* * *

Andrew Schneider is the business news reporter for KUHF Houston Public Radio. 

Monday, September 19, 2011

Weekly Update #20

Editor's Note

No theme this week, but I do have some related posts coming up.  You will have to scroll down to the next section in the post to find out more about that.  I will be starting a new segment this week called "Meet a Sidewinder", which will feature stories about people from alternate timelines who inhabit our own reality!  Sounds unbelievable, huh?  Well you will just have to wait to find out more.

Korsgaard and Kier both promise more posts in the future and as you may have heard, War Blogger has promised to share some his novel reviews with this blog, which is awesome.

Remember that you still have time to enter The Oral History of Doomsday Contest.  We have one entry so far and he is going to win by default unless you send in your submission.  Send all entries to ahwupdate at gmail dot com.

Meanwhile, we got our first reader from Uruguay.  Welcome!

And now the news...

Digital Science Fiction

Thanks to Korsgaard, I recently discovered a book series titled Digital Science Fiction.  It is quarterly collection of original science fiction short stories from professional writers and storytellers. Every Digital Science Fiction Anthology is published electronically for Amazon Kindle and Smashwords. They are also available in regular print versions approximately three weeks after the digital publication date. 

Pressure Suite, the third anthology in the series, is relevant to our blog because it will include an alternate history short story.  That story is called "Coil Gun" and it is written by Matt Quinn.  According to Digital Science Fiction's President Michael Wills, "Coil Gun" will be the series' first alternate history and has described Matt as "a great asset to our book series...both in terms of his story contribution and his efforts in promoting our label."  Anyone looking for more information on "Coil Gun" can check out Matt's blog here.

Korsgaard and I will be providing more information to you about this story.  I will be interviewing Matt and Korsgaard will be posting a review of the story this week.  So stay tuned for more information.  Also if anyone is interested in being the second person to publish an alternate history with Digital Science Fiction, Michael informs me that they are still accepting submissions for the fifth anthology.

More on a World Without 9/11

Thank you to Korsgaard and Henry Martin for their comments on my counterfactual essay on a world without 9/11.  Yes I think it is safe to say that in a world where the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon never happened, the political career of Barack Obama would have been very different and he would likely never have been nominated over Hillary Clinton in the 2010 presidential elections.

It looks like, however, that I was not the only one inspired by the ten year anniversary of 9/11 to write an alternate history about it.  Moeed Yusuf at the International Herald Tribune and Faheem Haider at the Foreign Policy Association both wrote intriguing articles about how the history of Afghanistan and Central Asia would progress without 9/11.  This is in contrast to the slide show Alternate History No 9/11 that has the United States being invaded by China in the near future.  Perhaps you should avoid watching that implausible piece of garbage and check out instead Osama by Israeli science fiction author Lavie Tidhar.  You can see a review of it here.

If someone can help me figure out where I can purchase said book, that would be great.

Coming Soon: The Domination

Domination, the omnibus volume containing the first three books of the Draka series, will be released as an ebook by Baen Dec 2011.  The Draka series is S. M. Stirling's controversial alternate history about the Loyalists from the American Revolution settling in South Africa instead of Canada.  They go on to create the Domination of Draka, a slave owning superpower that makes Apartheid South Africa look like Care-a-lot.  What is even more horrifying is that at one point you find yourself rooting for the Nazis to win!

Links to the Multiverse

Articles

The Complete History of Time Paradoxes by Charlie Jane Anders and Gordon Jackson, at io9.

Counterfactual States of America: On Parallel Worlds and Longing for the Law by Paul K. Saint-Amour at Post 45.

Interviews

Interview with Sidewise nominee Jay Lake at Locus.

Book

Review of 1632 by Eric Flint at Avallanath.

Review of The Big Switch by Harry Turtledove at lunarhunk.

Video Games

Review of Resistance 3 at Complex.

Media

Photos from the DragonCon 2011 Alternate History Track

Sunday, September 11, 2011

A World Without 9/11

Last updated 3/14/16.

There is no doubt that the September 11th terrorist attacks (or 9/11) changed the world.  It spawned the War on Terror, the invasion of Afghanistan, the Department of Homeland Security, the USA PATRIOT Act, the war in Iraq, anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States, anti-American sentiment across the globe, Guantanamo Bay, mass surveillance of Americans by their own government...the list goes on and on.  Now a whole post-9/11 generation is starting to grow up, and to them this is all they have ever known.

The events of that fateful day are still fresh in my mind almost as if it was yesterday. I was in high school in religion class (I went to a Catholic school) and we were told by the teacher that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. We wanted to learn more, but she insisted we finish class first. After that, things just got crazy, but enough about me, lets talk about changing history.

As alternate historians, we often speculate about how history would be different if some important historical event was changed.  For some reason, we tend to picture worlds that are in many ways worse off than our own.  Usually its because we take good outcomes, like the defeat of the Nazis or the end of the Soviet Union, and reverse them to create dystopias that are both entertaining and horrifying. So what happens if we take a bad outcome and reverse it? Would we get a better or worse world?

What would the world be like without 9/11?  Thanks to the members of AlternateHistory.com and others for inspiring me to write this scenario.

American Politics

I will start with the presidency of George W. Bush. In our timeline he will be remembered as a controversial leader, but what about in a world where 9/11 didn't happen? I do not buy the belief that without 9/11 he would never win his second term. He defeated Kerry by a much larger margin than he did Gore in 2000 and I personally blame the botched presidential campaign of the Democrats for whatever defeat they experienced in 2004.

In reality, Bush was a decent president who had to make some tough and unpopular decisions. He certainly was not the best president the United States ever had, but he is also not the worst and the country survived in spite of him. Without 9/11 he would have likely focused on domestic issues, though some of his more conservative policies might have failed without the strong support he received from the American people in the aftermath of 9/11. He would still have been reelected in 2004 by a much larger margin than our timeline with the Democrats putting up a sacrificial lamb, perhaps someone like Joe Lieberman.

His second term would not be as different from his first, though if a Hurricane Katrina happened as it did in our timeline (and the likelihood of that depends on how literal you take the butterfly effect) his administration would still suffer a black eye from that disaster and blemish his legacy as president. Perhaps Bush would try to distract people by having America take a more active role in the conflicts surrounding Israel, North Korea, Darfur or Somalia. Actual military intervention is likely only in Somalia or Sudan, but even then its a stretch.

American politics overall would be less radicalized and boring, with voters interested in moderate politicians and both parties moving to the center. The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street would never arise and libertarianism would remain a fringe ideology not taken seriously by Americans. There would be less gushing over political candidates on the cable news networks. People would still complain about the deficit, but without the massive spending caused by the War on Terror, things wouldn't be as bad (more on that later).

John McCain would have faced off against Hillary Clinton in 2008 and economic issues would likely be the deciding factor, but other issues like immigration would still be important. If Hillary is elected, she might try to offer Barack Obama a seat on the Supreme Court (or he may just stay a Senator) to stop him from challenging her position as party leader. If McCain is elected, his moderate policies may drive a wedge with the more conservative elements of his party, especially if he maintained his 2000 stances against flying the Confederate battle flag or opposing evangelist leaders that he once referred to as "agents of intolerance". Its difficult to speculate further about what would happen in 2012 and beyond at this point.

Either Clinton or McCain would have to deal with some sort of leak about mass surveillance of American citizens. War on Terror or not, as technology made communication easier and easier, it is frankly unlikely that the government would not try to spy on Americans. Frankly, the reason I think we haven't seen more outrage about the NSA and its spying is because most Americans just assumed the government was already spying on them. Having it confirmed doesn't really change the status quo.

Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani would not have his reputation without 9/11 and would not have run for the Republican nomination in 2008. Michael Bloomberg may also have never been elected mayor of New York City. Sarah Palin would be unknown outside of Alaska. I would love to speculate on what happens in the 2012 or 2016 elections, but that far from the point of divergence only makes this more of a fantasy and less a counterfactual.

World Politics

Outside the United States it is difficult to imagine how the world would be different. One could argue the United States would have better relations with world nations since they would not be building up their military, spying on their allies or projecting their power across the globe. Would this mean Russia and China would be more restrained in their interactions with their neighbors? Difficult to tell, but the US in this timeline would be more capable in waging a Cold War 2.0 rather than a War on Terror.

Certainly Saddam Hussein would have an even longer tenure as President of Iraq since, as Frank Harvey said in my interview with him, avoiding 9/11 was probably the only thing that could keep America out of Iraq in 2003. Then again, he may still fall from power if the Arab Spring still happened or else a civil war erupted. Many of the causes for that event would have existed without 9/11 and thus could still occur, even if it doesn't follow the exact timeline of events as we know them.

This means Islamist groups like ISIS could still arise and, incidentally, be more powerful in a world where the United States and its allies are not actively fighting terrorism. Some have argued, however, that America's actions post-9/11 have led to more converts to extreme Islamism, so perhaps in this world an alternate Arab Spring may actually allow for more democratic and moderate factions in the Middle East to prevail, such as in Tunisia. Either is possible, but which is the most plausible is still debatable.

As for Afghanistan, well the civil war there has been going on there since 1978 before the American intervention in our timeline and its unlikely to stop in this world without some sort of intervention.

Economy

The American economy would likely have been better off without all the spending on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. There may also be more corporate regulations, without 9/11 distracting people from Enron and other examples of corporate greed and mismanagement.  The FBI may even focus more attention on combating white collar crime without terrorism being a major issue. Thus, with there being a lot of distrust of major corporations, cases like Citizens United v. FEC may have been decided differently.

Would the Great Recession have been avoided? Probably not, as recessions and depressions are common to the global economy and the causes of it would still be around, but perhaps it might not have been as bad. More money in the budget may even mean that some of the ideas floating around at time about direct aide to Americans may actually have gotten past the drawing board.

Sports

The New York Yankees would go on to win the 2001 World Series. Without 9/11, Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling do not get a week off to rest. As a result, the Arizona Diamondbacks would not go on to beat the San Francisco Giants by two games for the Division title. The San Francisco Giants lose to the St. Louis Cardinals, the Cardinals defeat the Atlanta Braves, and the Cardinals lose to the Yankees.

Meanwhile, Pat Tillman would never have left his football career to join the military and would still be alive today. Furthermore, no one hears "God Bless America" at baseball games, thus there are no ugly moments where people are thrown out of games for not standing up for the "national anthem".

You may also see a lot less praising of soldiers and veterans at football games.

Film and Television

There are so many films and television shows inspired by 9/11 or the events following it that it is impossible to list them all. Team America, United 93, Flight 93, Fahrenheit 9/11 and World Trade Center would have not been produced, while Jackie Chan's Nosebleed would have been. 24, Fringe, Third Watch, West Wing, Rescue Me and Battlestar Galactica would either have not been produced or would have been vastly different from what they were in our timeline. The Lord of the Rings would not have been as popular without the need to escape the horrors of the post-9/11 world, but they will still make a lot of money. Also the Hobbit may not be split up into three separate films.

Other films may be more popular than they were in our timeline. The controversy surrounding films like Big Trouble and Collateral Damage would not exist and they may even have experienced some box office success. Tim Allen could have had a more successful movie career and Arnold Schwarzenegger may never have left his film career to run for Governor of California. I have heard Democrats and Republicans bemoan "The Governator" and it would be interesting to see what would happen in one of America's wealthiest states if someone else was holding the reigns of power from 2003 to 2011.

Gritty, realistic remakes would also be less prevalent as the constant images of terrorism and war wouldn't be shown on the news networks. This may mean no Batman Begins or else a more campy version of the iconic comic character. Iron Man would also have a different origin story for Tony Stark and much of the Marvel Cinematic Universe would be different because of that since S.H.I.E.L.D. would be less influenced by the modern American government and military.

Images of the World Trade Center in film and television would be more prevalent and obviously wouldn't be removed from promotional material.

Literature

Dick Cheney would likely be more popular (or more obscure) in this alternate history, thus Stephen King does not use him as inspiration for the antagonist in Under the Dome. In fact, other works by Stephen King, like the The Dark Tower VI: Song of Susannah, would be different since there would no references to the terrorist attack.

As for alternate history, people would stop asking SM Stirling why he didn't reference 9/11 in Conquistador (if it is still published). Lavie Tidhar would also never publish the award winning Osama. Also the old cliche of always having terrorists blow up some building(s) in the 21st century, regardless of how far back the point of divergence is, would rarely if ever appear. Those who do use it in this timeline would be lauded for their originality.

Music

Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey would likely have never been married, since they claim 9/11 brought them together. Their reality television show would never have been produced, Jessica's reputation for being dumb never materialized and both would be remembered for being singers, despite moving on to other projects.

Country music would also be different. The Dixie Chicks would not be boycotted by country fans for being anti-Bush and Toby Keith may not be as popular without 9/11 inspiring many of his famous songs.

Emo music would be very different as My Chemical Romance would likely not have formed since Gerald Way was motivated to start a band after 9/11. Green Day's American Idiot would not be released and the Broadway show it inspired would never be created. In fact Green Day may have disappeared entirely, being replaced by Sum 41, Blink 182 or some other pop/punk group.

Comics

DC Comics would never have Identity Crisis, as Dan DiDio said it was inspired in part by 9/11. If DC reboots their continuity in 2011, the new universe is far less paranoid and grim world then it is now. Frank Miller would never write Holy Terror and Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again would be slightly different. In fact, Miller may be an all around less controversial figure than he is in this timeline.

Meanwhile, Marvel would not have Civil War. I wish I could add more than that, but I have never been much of a Marvel comics fan.

Technology

Blogs would be less developed, without the politically charged climate of 9/11 to inspire authors to create their own blogs. Google News also would not have been created or else delayed, as the events of 9/11 convinced people we needed a quick way to search for the news.

Congress may never have cancelled construction of the F-22s, since America would likely continue with it's Cold War weapon mentality. Spending and development on drone technology may also be behind, but wouldn't be avoided altogether. Remote control aircraft aren't anything new and building ones big enough to pack heavy firepower doesn't require that much imagination.

With less government spending on wars, we may see a better funded NASA. The Space Shuttles would still be retired, but we would have had another program to take its place instead of relying on private contractors to get us into space. The timetable on returning to the Moon and reaching Mars may have an earlier date.

People may also have been more willing to construct larger skyscrapers, not being able to imagine a plane intentionally crashing into one, except only in the wildest pieces of fiction.

Muslim-Americans

Muslim-Americans (and people perceived as Muslim) may still face discrimination to some extent, but the hate crimes and rhetoric they have heard from mainstream politicians since 2001 would not exist. If one group of Muslims chose to build a mosque or community center close to the World Trade Center, no one would bat an eye.

Conclusion

Of course, this is all my opinion.  I could be very wrong about what a world without 9/11 would look like.  What are your thoughts?

* * *

Matt Mitrovich is the founder and editor of Alternate History Weekly Update, a blogger on Amazing Stories and a Sidewise Awards for Alternate History judge. When not writing he works as an attorney, enjoys life with his beautiful wife Alana and prepares for the day when travel between parallel universes becomes a reality. You can follow him on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Learn how you can support his alternate history projects on Patreon.