Just a few thoughts

Imagine, if you can, what would have happened in Iran had the US not invaded and killed Saddam Hussein?
We all seem to agree today that there were no weapons of mass destruction as defined by Bush and Cheney. And we all know that Saddam hated terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda. And we all know he had a strong army in the Revolutionary Guards. Maybe not against American air power and might, but certainly capable to keeping Iran and Syria at bay.
As a matter of fact, when one goes back into the history of George Bush Senior's 1991 war, we see that it was the US who betrayed Saddam, not the reverse. All for the advantage of a Kuwaiti Sheik.
So what can we expect in the future of that area because of these events? Well if you carefully glean the truth out of what some of the few independent reporters like Michael Ware say, we can wonder why the US is losing control even with the huge US military presence. Aggressive and bold action by opposing forces in Baghdad is keeping foreigners pinned into their bunkers and barracks. Car bombs are no longer the weapons in the countryside, they are daily occurrances within the supposedly controlled cities.
Embedded reporters only tell you what is approved to tell you.
(by the way, up until 2008, over 47 so called independent reporters have mysteriously been killed)
So assuming a scenario where the US did NOT kill Saddam, therefore sending the country into it's present chaos, what would have happened?
I believe that Saddam would have become a staunch and serious ally to the peaceful interests in the Middle East.
Iraq was a buffer between Iran and Syria, crucial now with the unknown nuclear ambitions of Iran. With American help, (much less costly than the present situation) Saddam would have had a strong influence in the region and would likely have deterred any aggressive plans against Israel. The spark of a potential conflagration.
Instead of daily bombings in Baghdad and other towns, we would have had Iraq as a showcase for peaceful negotiations and sensibilities with a dynamic economy.
Saddam Hussein would have been been a strong and feared opponent of terrorist plans in the Middle East and how they seep into the Western democracies. A model to other countries like Pakistan that co existence with the West IS a realistic option.
One can reason that in spite of Saddam's methods of controlling his own people, and his excesses, hundreds of American and alliance soldiers would be alive today.
The war in Iraq will never be seen as futile. That part of history will never be written by those involved, but that doesn't mean the thoughts are not in the minds of millions on both sides of the equation.