The human mind has a tough time grasping the horrors that would have come to pass. Whatever exists today, just imagine something about 5 to 10 times worse, and that's what it would have been like. Thanks for asking.

I don't think we would have invaded Iraq. Under the current administration I believe we would have invaded Iraq even if 9/11 had not happened. It was on the agenda from the beginning.

Whether we would have caught bin Laden is impossible to say.

The state of the country? For one thing the budget deficit wouldn't be where it's at today because we wouldn't be spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a war and the effort to fix what we have broken. The country also would not be as divided as it is today. The division in this country is the strongest it's been since Viet Nam.

i agree with rick.

Invading Iraq was George W's idea. He had to make excuses to why we should. A little boy playing war. He is such an idiot. This war is stupid and put undue hardship on our country, not to mention the lost of so many lives.   His popularity rating has sunk so low he has to learn fractions.

I doubt wether the U.S would have went to war. 9/11 would have been called an air disaster just like the previous bombing of the trade towers was called other than what it was.
Bin Laden who. The name would never would have been mentioned.
There would never had been a tax cut.
current unemployment would not be 4.4%
Illegal imigrants would all be citizens by now.
Our national secrets would have all been sold by now.

illegal imigrants are already citizens and have been for a long time and our national secrets have always been sold.

Mike, just think of: WTC Round I, TWA 800, Egypt Air 990, USS Cole, etc. and our *cough* non *cough* responses.
(Apologies to Jack Nicholson) You don't have enough blog space handle the answer :-)
Oh yeah, gas would be $4.00 a gallon.
The good news is that it would be DOWN from $5.00 a gallon.

mike - i'd like to hear your views, too.

emily- i don't think we would be in iraq if there had been a democratic president.that war just seems about as bad as vietnam depending on who you ask.it cost my buddy a divorce.he left in 2003 and came back in 2004 and went on to become a police officer in a small town.i'll never get in that line of work because its too dangerous and i like keeping my own hours.i do security work and thought maybe i was going to be drafted but i never was.my buddy was called up with the national guard.he called me worried the night before he left and i just told him to keep his head up.he got irritated because he voted for bush in 2000 and then when he was in iraq he got sick of being lied to about when he was going to be able to come home and it also cost him his marriage so he felt sort of betrayed a little by bush and his cronies so he voted for kerry in 2004.i think there are plenty of soldiers then and now who are very disgruntled by this whole thing.there are certain people who think the gas prices would've been sky high and that we would've been attacked by now if there would've been a democrat but who knows? its very interesting to see the replies.i love debating with people and seeing what the opinions are on things like this.clinton was in memphis with harold ford junior here a few days ago.clinton is going to all the states helping the democrats drum up support in these senate races so they can take back a little control in this thing.if i'm correct i think the republicans have pretty much been in control of things for the last twelve years and thats a long time......

no one knows what a dem pres would have done about 911 but i can say it wouldn't have been a decision to go to war by one man on another mans say so. there would have been a united effort if it had been necessary to go to war. it also wouldn't have been some vendetta that took place.
As for finding and disposing of the bad guys no one seem to remember that they passed some law that said we couldn't assassinate anyone in another country for the sake of killing a bad guy. Some of these guys were targeted and after the failed attempt on momar kadafi. They passed the no kill law.
That law was rescinded after 911

i remember when reagan bombed libya looking for kadafi.i think that was in '86 or so.i actually like reagan back in the day even though he was a republican.i remember him coming across as a very straight and honest kind of man who could also be hard as nails if he had to.

everybody was afraid of Reagan nobody new what he would do next..... it was that action that cause them to pass the law where we couldn't assassinate bad guys for the sake of getting rid of them. As for the war in iraq we've been there 3 yrs longer than we were in WW 2. And we'll be there another 5/10 yrs and more than likely have a base there for and indefinite period of time.

What kills me is nobody want's to be held accountable for Iraq. No one will commit to any wrong doing. When this presidency is over and they open the books there will be all kinds of hell to pay.

yep there will be all kinds of hell to pay.all these fear tactics bush is using getting everybody scared of the "boogeyman" is getting real old fast.thats the basis for his whole presidency is this terrorist angle.we must defeat "them" whoever "them" is.i think he has messed this country up bad and put us on the wrong road.i'm pretty sure tens of millions agree with me when i say i'm sick of the whole fiasco.give it up george and give up the course.some people are so hard headed they can't admit they made mistakes and thats what bush has done.how bout screw iraq and take care of america.remember america?

JAP69 and time*treat, I enjoyed your comments because it is always a pleasure to see facts, vs. all the baby emotional comments like "Bush is dumb".

Lottomike, the Democrats were in charge for 40 years before the Republicans' last 12. If you want to be overly simplistic in your approach and pin all the bad events that take place to the party in charge at the time, then I believe the Democrats have a far worse track record.

You say you love "the debate", but I don't see any debate. Emotional stories or empty rhetoric like "Bush lied" is not debate, and certainly not fact.

In your mind, saying that a buddy felt lied to somehow cancels the overwhelming support by 99% of the troops of their president of their mission. You are drinking the Kool-Aid, my friend. What you are doing is seeking anything that supports your own personal beliefs. You can use the same technique to support any position at all. Think about it: take any wacky belief, and then I'm sure you can come up with some shred of a story that would support it. You can use that technique to convince yourself that "Bush lied", "Bush is taking the Iraq oil to make himself rich", "tax breaks for the wealthy", etc., etc., etc.

If it makes you personally content and happy to dwell in those thoughts, then so be it, but once you're ready to step back into reality you'll wonder why you wasted your time in the land of Oz.

The comments that "illegal imigrants are already citizens and have been for a long time and our national secrets have always been sold" are weird. It's scary knowing that someone saying such things gets a vote, but hey, it's America, and everyone gets a vote, no matter how weird.

todd i'll be the first to admit i'm not the smartest person about these things.i'm almost 32 years old and i didn't really start paying attention to politics until bush and 9/11.there have probably been bad things the democrats did through the sixties on up through the millenium but i just never knew about them.i've got children and i don't like crime and other social ills so there might come a time where i end up leaning toward the republican side of things.i would also support a war if we ever needed to go.for some reason i don't seem to like bush that well.i don't think its a problem with republicans but just him......