What the USAK is proposing to do now is illegal anyway.

Once you recognise a government you recognise that government own the embassies and frozen assets. If they belong to private citizens it nationalises them - I know that wouldn't go down too well with the USA, but it's legal enough.

And if the the UN recognises a government, there's nothing illegal in assisting it.

What I mean is, not that this plan would necessarily work as it stands, but there are ways around the legal arguments Teribus came up with.

I predict that if the US tries to run a viceroy type regime in a post Saddam Iraq they are going to find themselves in armed conflict with anti-Saddam Iraqis.