Bush Sr. had made a solemn agreement with our European and Arabian allies not to invade Iraq after the first Persian Gulf War. It would have been seen (correctly) as an act of treachery to have violated that agreement and invaded. Based upon the information he had, Bush Sr. believed that Saddam was mortally wounded politically by this massive defeat and would eventually be taken out by his own generals. If we are to criticize Bush Sr. it would be for under estimating the amount of terror that Saddam held over his own subordinates. If Saddam's regieme had folded under a counter revolution, Bush would have been widely praised for his precise use of military force. It's easy to criticise a decision after the fact. Particularly if the decision was based upon many conflicting facts and considerations.

Gary