I'm proud to "respectfully" differ a tad here and a tucj there with y'all , but here goes.

(quote)
"Now, let's look at another aspect of the motivation for not going into Bagdad. First, there was the same delimma that now exists in that what had looked like a victorious mission could have become tarnished in an urban warfare setting. "

Correct me if I'm wrong, here, Rev, but , best as I can recollect ,
there was no conventional wisdom consensus for or against "urban warfare" because what the real world reason term leaves that collective bad taste was a direct result of the debacle in Somalia....which didn't happen until the election year of 1992...and the unmentioned reason Papa Bush initiated that so-called "humanitarian millitary mission" in an election year was to avoid like the plague what was already burning wild in Bosnia which we had to ultimately go into to clean anyway and much to Clinton ,and "not" the UN's or the EU's credit .
There never would have been an election called that ultimately outse Milosevic had not the military "cop on the beat" not been a serious factor. Same with Saddam.

(quote)
"But probably more important is the relationship that the US had had with Saddam. The US had been his allie, had armed him aginst the Iranians and thought they knew him welll enough to "contain" him."

We both agree on the abyssmal arrogance of that stupidity seeing as how this exact reason didn't stop bush from rounding up Noriega in Panama. Remember "that" police action after Bush's dirty hands relationship sponsoring him during the Contra build-up and the prepping for another Viet Nam in Central America that was finally successfully derailed ?( ofcourse it led to the covert ops that were finally exposed in the Iran-Contra debacle.)

(quote)
"There is also the very real possibility that the US had given him a quiet nod to go into Kuwait by not making much of a stink about it when they first learned of his plans, ..."

Again ,Rev.Bobert ,we are on the same page. I well remember the actual cpongressional hearings on precisely that subject becasue the womna ,one April glasby ,was the one representing the Bushites that met with Saddam and was the key witness answering questions at that hearing. I know this because I can ,again ,back it up with the v-tape I did of C-Span's covering this hearing.
And ,Yes, the Bushites did give her the messgae to give Saddam that the U.S. took no position on his plans. Thus greenlighting the Kuwait invasion by saying they have no opinion.
The extra mile you have yet to go with this has to do with my intuition at the time that with this great big multi-trillion$ budget-busting Reagan military had just won the cold War with the USSR's collapse and didn't have a justification anymore for its obscene largesse. I still believe Saddam was perfect foil for showing a public starting to wonder where all their money went and question why they had to. Remember too that what would prove to be the $500 billion bailout of the Savings & Loan debacle was also in the headlines.

My issue with the Rhymer is his simplistic lumping together of my opinions with that of the Marine whom I was clearly "challenging" on his points. Also his failure to quote what I had said that was "indefensible" such as naming all of the other nations that should disarm. I don't thin it a stretch to imagine what N.Korea would do if South Korea disarmmed and just chanted "Give Peace a Chance" in Korean on the demilitarized zone nor would Beijing act any less diplomatically about reclaiming Taiwan should they completely disarm.
The point I was making was look what peaceful civil disobedience got the Tibetians.
till i see some well-chosen words addressing 'these" realities as well I guess I'll still have to take issue with the "Blame America Firsters".
You know i take a back seat to "no one" criticizing the obscenities of our miltiary industrial complex ; but to pretend all would be fine with the world if it were unilaterally dismantled have "ye" to make their case with me.
And in all of this I "still" say where is the Islamic equivalent to a Mahama Gandhi.
Clearly sitting on one's hands in the face of evil is no answer either. Even the great Gandhi's solution of separation of Muslim's and Indian's hasn't solved the fundamental animosities between them had America never been created.

I guess consider me in the " Let the Nation's clean of the Sin of War ast the First Stone " camp.