Traditionally dictators and tyrants keep good order over the nations they rule, because to do otherwise would put their rule in peril. Once the tyrant is deposed new potential tyrants emerge and the nation suffers civil war and destruction until one tyrant manages to seize power.
Dictators that ruled without mercy did manage to prevent internal strife. The strife that now afflicts Iraq, Syria and Libya and Afghanistan would not have happened under their former now deposed rulers or in the case of Syria had there been now attempt at overthrow.
When we are asked by politicians, (who ask the question rhetorically) “would you rather have Saddam in power?” then I suppose the best way to answer is not to treat it as a rhetorical question but count the bodies in a balance sheet of death. Certainly dictators have killed many people, and many more have been killed after dictators have been overthrown or in the course of overthrowing them.
If we count the dead we can see the cost of tyranny and the cost of opposing tyranny.
One item in the balance sheet which outweighs death is freedom but I do not see much freedom in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan to enter into these balance sheets of death.