User blog comment:VENEZUELA/No September 11, 2001/@comment-461469-20100820043139

I think Bush would only have one term: 9/11 and the "national security" issues he campaigned on in 2004 would not be available, and he was already heading out to the dust bin of history before 9/11 as a Reagan impersonator: low taxes+large surpluses= booming economy, but he would have still spent away the Clinton surpluses, but not to the same extent.

If environmental issues became more important, then Bush still would have been either forced to change his position (it doesn't exist), or be booted out of office in 2004.

And, I don't see Al Qaeda just dying, but would still strike at the US on a later date, as the causes for Radical Islam are still there: Israel, American interference in Mid East Issues, betrayal after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan. And, if they do strike at the US, it might be an even bigger, more devastating target: say the combined Congress, the President and the Supreme Court at the same place, so say the State of the Union address, or a dirty nuke in NYC, or Washington, or even Seattle or Omaha. Al Qaeda will still attack, no doubt about it.

I know, that's basically Tom Clancy 's Debt of Honor, but Al Qaeda wouldn't just go away if their was no 9/11: they would just focus on a better, more symbolic and important target. They