Speculation Becomes Empirical: It looks like Christopher Hitchens' theory (RealVideo) that the collapse of Saddam and the rise of an unstable Uday regime as a counterfactual to the anti-war Left's rosey scenario of a stable, sanctions-starved and oppressed "contained" Iraq is gaining credence:

The eldest son of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was plotting to overthrow his father just as US troops advanced on Baghdad in March 2003, journalist Peter Arnett claimed in Playboy Magazine.

God only knows what Iran, Turkey, Syria and Saudi Arabia would have done in reaction to this internal collapse/coup; not to mention the Kurds and Southern Shiites. What should/would our response have been if we were still engaged only in 1990's no-fly zone enforcements while this occured?

Uday had planned to announce his seizure of the crumbling reins of power later the same day, but was thwarted when US jets bombed his Youth TV studios in Baghdad, according to Arnett.

The ambitious heir had even formed a shadow government on the outskirts of Iraq's capital, Baghdad that was disguised under the cover of his powerful Olympic committee and funded by murky oil deals, he said

But wait! I can hear the pacifist "containers" now, this is exactly what they were planning on, they just didn't have the balls to say it, but Uday was supposed to be the internal revolutionary that did the job from a position of authenticity.

According to Arnett, the oldest son of the Iraqi dictator had long been chafing under his father's iron fisted rule and blamed his father for the punishing international sanctions on the country.

"Though it has not been reported until now, Uday Hussein was the biggest proponent of regime change inside Iraq," Arnett wrote.

"During the previous 10 years, he had slowly assembled the elements of power -- military, military and political management -- designed to overthrow his tyrannical father," said the reporter who was in Baghdad as US troops approached following the launch of the March 19, 2003 US-led attack.

After listening to the Chicago Tribune's Jim Warren repeat himself endlessly that democracy simply cannot be sparked from external agents, but must result from internal revolution (paraphrasing - if you want to hear his own words, watch him as he ignores Christopher Hitchens' well-made points on another C-SPAN RealVideo), I think I'll drop him an email asking about his thoughts on this bit of Arnett reportage.