Very thoughtful and good article.

I suspect that if we're nominating significant events then the "hanging chad" and a biased electoral system and supreme court had more to do with Bush winning Florida than Elian Gonzales

Shal,
I think that the author made his point. Had Elian Gonzalez not been rescued the Florida election would not have been so close and that therefore, probably, the whole presidential election would not have depended on the hanging chad or the USA Supreme Court.

I don't agree that Gore, as president, would have started his lies about the cause of climate change earlier. Being president would have been enough even for his big,fat ego.

Foyle,
Chicken or egg?

my point was that it wasn't really that close. If the electoral system had been fair and a whole raft of voters were not disenfranchised, and if the Supreme Court had not taken a totally partisan position, then it was game over and Gore is president and Gonzales is a footnote in history (as i suspect he will be anyway). in any event Gavrilo Princip may have been the catalytic spark that initiated WW1. But he didn't cause the war.

I was under the distinct impression that we were still in the early part of the 21st century. We can only really tell turning points or really significant moments looking back. Obviously the Treaty of Versailles was a mistake, and various commentators did point it out at the time, but we can only agree on this well after the event.
Similarly with the Iraq war. How significant is it compared with, say, the 10 year Iran-Iraq war, or the seemingly endless troubles elsewhere in the region?
As for global warming.. what happens if its all forgotten in a decade or so when the world refuses to warm as required - in fact continues to cool as it has been doing? The author should not be so ready to call significant events..