Saddam Hussain: Iraki Leader

Just watched "House of Saddam - HBO series". Looking at Iraki society, it seems so plausible why he could be a legitimate leader. His legitimacy is valid in the sense that there is no mechanism in place to replace him rather than having another dictator.
I have an Iraki-American friend and often get to know the arab version of the world. In his version, he seemed to be the best of the worst leaders they could have had. The rift between Shia and Sunni has been playing in Irak since prophet's nephew was murdered and broke that idolator Iranian heart. After all, Iranians gave us our religion, at least the nature worshipping part, and also the part where we worship the kings, perfect men e.g. Rama and Krishna. Thus, I could understand their point why caliphate should have stayed with the Prophet's blood line. Prophet's family is the perfect family and spilling the holy blood 1000s years ago made Arabs barbarian in Shia's eyes.
Given this background, saddam was secular in pursuit of his power and was paranoid( as needed, ask Andy Grove ), brutal( what is detractors did to him ) and had western political goals ( education, political party, military ) rather than religious absolute goal which blindsides a person to every other concern( I know it personally. Brahmins often thought that world is maya and just this idea made India slightly unconcerned with earthly concerns. They even influenced Kings, both Hindu and Muslim, Dara Sikoh...It kind of makes you zone out and all earthly concern seem pitiful).
In short, he was not a psycho. His weaknesses were like of Bush and other powerful family's in democratic society where loyalty is rewarded. If he were surrounded by more democratic ambience, he would have been a decent forceful leader.