One other point I failed to make....
Two bit dictators are bad for oil prices. Again, for emphasis, two bit dictators reduce oil prices. The crazier the better.
Why? Because they have to sell their oil to somebody. They can not afford to sit on it.
Hugo Chavez serves as an excellent example. He sells more oil at lower prices than anyone else. He has done a lousy job of managing Venezuela's economy and must bring in as much quick cash as he can to keep his corrupt government in power.
Saddam Hussein sold more oil, 3.5 million barrels a day, than the US/Iraqi partnerships can produce which has been nearly half that amount, 1.8 million barrells a day, which has been decreasing at around 4% a year.
The US needs to realize that a war is not required to maintain the flow of oil. Quite to the contrary, crazy dictators are the Crazy Eddie's of the oil biz. They help consumers by being unwilling to work with the other members of the Cartels, by running "fire sales" to prop up their governments and by subsidizing oil to other third world nations.
The OPEC members want to sell their oil. The crazies HAVE to sell their oil. There is a difference that benefits consumers.
Arguably, Bush removed Saddam to remove a competitor to his buddies in Arab nations and back in Texas who were heavily invested in the oil business.