>> But I again ask the question: In 1991 were these guys (ie Turk elites) demanding the end to Saddam or encouraging his contiuation in power?
They were demanding the end to Saddam. The whole region was left high and dry.
>> The President "deserve" it (PAYING A PRICE FOR THE ERRORS OF THOSE WHO WENT BEFORE HIM)?
I never said he did.
>> made us look feckless (we were in a way),
That's why I urge you to ask yourself whether you collectively deserve it. Who elected those who cut and ran?
It isn't difficult to understand -- and respect -- the Turkish position. They are looking out for their own national interests -- which is precisely what their leadership is expected to do.
Similarly, the Bush administration is looking after the USA's national interests. Which, in this case, probably means a strong military presence in Iraq -- over an extended period.
Iraq is due to serve as our Middle East hunting lodge -- from which we sally forth to bag al-Qaeda and other terrorists -- while threatening those who harbor them.
Taking on this task requires that the internal politics of Iraq not be overly fractious. That the Kurds, as well as the Shiites, don't make themselves into an unnecessary distraction.
In this sense, the interests of Turkey and USA are neatly conjoined. Accordingly, I would expect an agreeable arrangement to be concluded.