If Bush 41 took Saddam down in 1991?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Well there would be many differences from 1991 and 2003:

1. The US would have a force of 750k troops to occupy Iraq rather than 150k which makes it much harder for an insurgency to hold

2. In 2003 the US more or less had the goal of toppling Suddam Hussein so they went straight for Baghdad as their main goals instead of destroying the Iraqi military. In 1991 the US had basically completely encircled the entire Iraqi military and if they continued , the entire Iraqi military would have been either killed or taken prisoner . Keep in mind much of what made up the Iraqi insurgency and later ISIS  were former members of Suddam’s military

3.  2003 was 12 years after brutal sanctions that had destroyed much of iraq as well and had radicalized many people in iraq too


So things likely would have been way better in 1991 than 2003 in terms of occupation but given these factors alone the US Continuing past the original mission would make the US look like an imperial power who massacred a much weaker army . Doing so would very much undermine the type of order the US claimed it wanted to build in the post Cold War world 

[OSR stands with Israel]

I was under the impression that the Gulf War was already seen as a great victory and the height of Bush's popularity. Am I wrong about that? I don't think deposing Saddam would've made Bush any more popular in the long run, especially since the ensuing chaos of a leaderless Iraq would be a concern that would probably overshadow whatever shallow patriotism people were enjoying during the Gulf War that happened in our timeline.

Keep in mind in 1991 we would have had 750k troops on the ground and not 150k which makes it easier to stamp out an insurgency. Also keep in mind that the people who made up much of the original military were former members of Suddam's military as in 2003 we went straight for Baghdad instead of trying to destroy their military first while in 1991, we basically were on the verge of completely encircling the entire Iraqi military so if we continued it is very likely we would have literally destroyed their entire military.

I believe this was the reason we did not do this as killing more than half a million Iraqi soldiers while losing 200 of your own would be considered a massacre especially given that we would have done that after already completing the state mission and would have created a horrible precedent for the future too. President George HW Bush unlike President George W Bush was able to see the bigger picture and ultimately made the right decision by not taking out Suddam in 1991.