It’s possible to speculate that such a scenario might not have been as bad as what happened post-invasion, but it’s also possible to imagine that it might have been much worse, with surrounding countries less inhibited from intervening.

An internal Baathist coup might have been much less bloody, but I don’t see how that could be considered a great solution, plus it had been tried and had failed.

The idea that a broad ANC-like coalition in exile with widespread internal popular support could have been formed is attractive, but this was after all what Chalabi and Co. were trying to do. The idea that lifting sanctions would have helped such a process seems to be contradicted by your invocation of a South African model. Lifting sanctions would surely have strengthened the regime, making it even easier for Saddam to suppress internal dissent.

This is from your earlier comment. I can only assume that this means that if we had faciliated descent by Shia, Kurds, Secularists and amongst the Baath that they would all have ended up slaughtering each other once Saddam was removed. This is to ignore the fact that ethnic conflict in Iraq was stimulated by the invasion and was aided by the fact that was it was absorbed into violence that was being rationalised as being part of the insurrection. The take-off to the insurrection/ethnic conflict was also stimulated, in part, by intial Al Qaeda and other imports who rushed across the unguarded borders in Iraq in the early days. What a clandestine Iraq needed encouraging to develop was its own loose form of ANC.

“Army: Iraq Occupation was Understaffed” at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/29/world/main4217961.shtml

At what point does utter incompetence invalidate the most worthy of projects? Certainly the stupidity of the Bush Administration, both civilian and military has reached that point some time ago.

The fact that a regime reacts disproportionately against particular acts or people is not necessarily evidence of the effectiveness of those acts/people.
It is evidence of the petty spiteful paranoia of repressive regimes world wide.

I speak from experience, of the kind of thing the SA regime tried to do to me and my family and did to people I knew. Your snide attempt at presuming what “some people like Ami” think is misdirected.

I want to break something.

“It’s all about the he said she said bullshit…”

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,356577,00.html

Well at least Saddam was “contained” eh?

Speaking of polls, here is one from March on the 5th anniversary of the US-led Invasion of Iraq. It is three months old, but I doubt if American public opinion has changed significantly in that time.
“Poll: Most Americans Say War Not Worth It: 64 Percent Say Results of War Not Worth American Lives Lost” at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/18/main3946663.shtml

Note: Had the rationale been offered before the Invasion of March 2003, that the US & its allies should go to war to free the Iraq People from Saddam’s Tyrannery, it would have been dismissed out of hand. Instead it was all sorts of scare stories about Saddam having vast numbers of WMD, launching in 45 minutes etec., all of which has since turned out to be false. That is why the majority of Americans have turned against Bush/Cheney’s Iraq War.

Oh really? Like the people of Basra who’ve just had their city liberated from Iranian-backed militias who were terrorising the population? Basrans are grateful to the Iraqi army, which as you must know is trained and supported by the US military.

the Mahadi Army won the civil war

The ethnic cleansing is now being reversed with Sunni families returning to areas they were expelled from in and around Baghdad. The Iraqi army has moved into Sadr City unopposed and is defeating the al-Qaeda remnants in Mosul. Sadr himself has ordered the Mahdi militia to be disbanded after the crushing losses it has suffered at the hands of the Iraqi Army. All the indications are that the Iraqi Army is gaining control of the country. That’s really upsetting you, isn’t it?