First off, welcome back to the BBS... Good to see you around again.

Thanks. I am glad to be in good company again .

I'm not sure how all the fabrications and collateral damage during Desert Storm relate to the question of whether the U.S. and its allies would have been allowed to keep going once Kuwait was liberated. Once the job was done, there was no chance of being given International support to keep going. There was already spotty participation from some of the coalition countries, and they were only there because of the U.N. resolutions, resolutions which were passed solely to get Iraq out of Kuwait. I can't imagine any scenario in which further U.N. resolutions would have been passed to keep the coalition together for an assault on Saddam Hussein's regime.

I meant to say that the world was not exaclty nitpicking at details of Desetr Storm. I agree there was no chance for a new SC resolution authorizing removal of Saddam Hussein's regime (nor is there basis in UN Charter for one), but I don't think there would be much furor if US just continued the push (especially if done quickly and with pretext - or, even better, genuine reason - of protecting Kurds on the North).

Incidentally, though Kuwait is not exactly a shining example of democracy, there are competitive elections, a Parliament, etc. It's really the only Arab state in the Gulf with anything resembling a legitimate political system.

Yes, one has to put things in perspactive.... US certainly has friends with less of resemblance of democratic societies (e.g. Saudi Arabia from which, incidentally, most of 9/11 hijackers came). Thanks for the correction.