What if Al-Quaida Strikes G-7 Summit in Genoa.

fortyseven

I posted this on the old board, it was too recent tho. Following 9/11, it came out that Al-Qaida had been planning to attack the G-7 Summit in Genoa. I'm not sure why they didn't. Anyway...

What if Al-Quaida sends at least 2 airpalnes to crash into the site of the G-7 summit in Genoa in July 2001. It's likelly that all the leaders (Bush, Cretien,Blair, etc) will be killed.
 

mattep74

They get a bigger deathtoll if they attack the EU summit in Gothenbourg i june 2001 and crash into the building the meeting is at when Bush is there. Heads of state of all the EU nations will be gone plus Bush.
 

MerryPrankster

If al-Qaeda managed to zap the heads of state of the US and the major European countries, they might be able to pull some shenanigans in the chaos.

Stealing nukes or trying to pull an "Islamic Republic of France" is unlikely, but perhaps they topple a Gulf monarchy or two while everyone is distracted?
 

Torqumada

Matt Quinn said:
If al-Qaeda managed to zap the heads of state of the US and the major European countries, they might be able to pull some shenanigans in the chaos.

Stealing nukes or trying to pull an "Islamic Republic of France" is unlikely, but perhaps they topple a Gulf monarchy or two while everyone is distracted?
Click to expand...

The G-8 confrence is going to happen off of the coast of GA in a few weeks. Security is very tight, even now, almost to the point of paranoia. Local land owners are being photgraphed and cataloged. They are even being told that they can't rent their properties to protestors. Its almost draconic in nature. I would be very surprised if Al-Qaeda could strike there.

Torqumada
 

fortyseven

The G-8 summit in Genoa had an anti-aircraft battery to protect against an air attack. Assuming Al-Qaida flew commercial planes like they did on 9/11 then they would succeed.

@Matt

BY topple a couple Gulf monarchies, do you mean by assassinating the monarchs or thru popular support? Putting their own man or taking over themselves?
 

MerryPrankster

I was thinking of a full-on coup attempt, not just merely zapping the king. You don't need to paralyze the state(s) that prop up the Gulf monarchies if you just want to kill the king; however, if you don't want outside intervention, you need to screw up the potential intervener something fierce.

There is a great deal of popular discontent with the various "oil shieks", and al-Qaeda is quite willing to harness that. The Saudis might be able to weather an internal uprising (or perhaps not...their army refused to fight the 1980 Great Mosque rebels and they had to call in the French), but I imagine one or more of the small monarchies might be overthrown (at least temporarily).

However, if the US figures out a connection between the new "Islamic Republic of (Whatever)" and the killings of several heads of state and probably several thousand innocent bystanders, all hell is going to fall on them.
 

Torqumada

fortyseven said:
The G-8 summit in Genoa had an anti-aircraft battery to protect against an air attack. Assuming Al-Qaida flew commercial planes like they did on 9/11 then they would succeed.

@Matt

BY topple a couple Gulf monarchies, do you mean by assassinating the monarchs or thru popular support? Putting their own man or taking over themselves?
Click to expand...

Military weapons are designed to bring down small, relatively light aircraft. For example, an F-18 weighs about 66,000 lbs fully loaded. A 767, like those used on 9/11, weigh 450,000 lbs fully loaded. A stinger is not going to vaporise an air liner. It might take out an engine, but not bring one down immediately.

Torqumada
 

carlton_bach

Torqumada said:
Military weapons are designed to bring down small, relatively light aircraft. For example, an F-18 weighs about 66,000 lbs fully loaded. A 767, like those used on 9/11, weigh 450,000 lbs fully loaded. A stinger is not going to vaporise an air liner. It might take out an engine, but not bring one down immediately.
Click to expand...

You don't need to vaporise it, just stop it from going where it wants to go. That should be easy enough. You have to remember, those AA batteries are there not to protect the city or its population, they are there to protect the summit. If the plane is hit on its approach to the conference centre and crashes into an apartment block, that counts as success. It's not much different from the policing style used.

BTW, is it just me, or does anyone else suspect Al Quaeda might post a net gain in popularity in the Western world for taking out our collective governments? :p
 

Torqumada

Planes are pretty sturdy. Remember the one back in the 80's that had part of the fuselage torn off and still landed safely? Anti-aircraft missles don't carry that much explosive (2.2 lbs in the case of a stinger). Even when they hit a smaller, military plane directly, they usually don't vaporise it instantly. Many have proximity fuses that explode near the plane, in the hopes of damaging the plane enough to knock it out of the sky. A jetliner is much larger and has more engines that are spaced further out. Knock 2 engines out of a 4 engine jet liner and it can still fly to its target. The best deterrent to a hijack jetliner/kamikaze attack, would be fighter jets. They would be able to stay on target long enough to insure enough damage is done to the aircraft to knock it down.

Torqumada
 
Last edited:

Steffen

carlton_bach said:
BTW, is it just me, or does anyone else suspect Al Quaeda might post a net gain in popularity in the Western world for taking out our collective governments? :p
Click to expand...

If Al Quaido blows up a G8 summit, will they become more popular in anti-globalist (attac et al) circles?
 

fhaessig

Isn't this the BEFORE 1900 group?:mad:

SO what's the TL which devellop both AQ and a G-7 summint before 1900? AH Challenge for all who posted on this thred.:D
 

carlton_bach

Steffen said:
If Al Quaido blows up a G8 summit, will they become more popular in anti-globalist (attac et al) circles?
Click to expand...

Only if they manage without killing any protestors,. I guess :p

No, before the recent spate of elections, dissatisfaction with sitting governments in much of the industrialised world was at an all-time high, which is why I (facetiously) suggested ahat an attack that killed Schroeder, Chirac, Berlusconi, Bush, Koizumi, Putin and Blair might not be met with quite the degree of horror that many anticipated.
 

Berra

The London bombings happened the same time as a G8 summit. It would have been a great target if we think in terms of their propaganda. Bush and Blair and Putin as a bonus.

So if you have this mighty guy Allah on your side, your going to pull it of, right. Somewere there somthing fishy here.

I want to know more about the conection anti-globalisation ad Al-Q.

The sucess of the rioters in public opinion is becouse they are the underdog and they could claim police brutality. One happy protester after a plane crash and they are lose their underdogness.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
The big powers would take up new leaders without a breath. Any country having a coup clearly linked to the incident would very quickly be under UN occupation.

al-Qaeda would be hunted down with a worldwide ruthlessness that would set the standard for years to come. If there's one thing ALL leaders of ALL nations just won't put up with in any way it's somebody actually trying to hurt them personally for any reason whatsoever but particularly for all they trouble they visit on us..
 

Max Sinister

Banned
I'm not a big fan of Dubya, Berlusconi and Putin (and to a lesser degree of Koizumi, Blair and Chirac), but wouldn't killing them make them somehow martyrs? (Not that Al-Qaida may think much about it.)
 

Wendell

Well, Putin's Premier would ascend to the Russian Presidency. Might there be some nasty repraisals in Chechnya and Dagestan?

Cheney would be President in the U.S. I know many do not like him, but I'd think he would be a better President than George Bush. Not alot would change, although, there White House might be slightly less socially conservative and slightly more fiscally conservative.

I'm not sure how the U.K. would react.

Riots might take place in France. Is this/would this be before the current Premiere to power?

Japan: see U.K. Although, this may have some interesting ramifications...
 

Max Sinister

Banned
In Germany, they might make Müntefering chancellor. Difficult to say whether he or Edmund Stoiber would win the election of 2002. Besides, the two are said to be, well, not really enemies despite being in different parties.
 

Wendell

Max Sinister said:
In Germany, they might make Müntefering chancellor. Difficult to say whether he or Edmund Stoiber would win the election of 2002. Besides, the two are said to be, well, not really enemies despite being in different parties.
Click to expand...
Well, either choice would make things interesting...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top