Holy shit... I had been planning a thread like this!
Now before we analyze the regime, let us analyze the demographics - Kurds and Arabs, Sunnis and Shiites. Iraq is a huge desert, unlike Syria, and consequently also has many Bedouin tribes and other tribal Arab populations. So, in a way it's a mix of Libya's current civil war and the Iraqi Civil War of 2006.
Saddam would probably exterminate people by the hundreds of thousands, if they even dare rise up. His hard line policies against the West would at the very least earn him respect from the Sunni Arab minority - as well as other minorities that he protected. He did exterminate minorities along with Kurds, but that was only after a rebellion. If they do not rebel, they're safe.
Now assuming he had till 2011 to reign over Iraq - I wonder if he'd have changed by then? Maybe somewhat more lenient? Perhaps aimed at a national reconciliation? After all, Iraq has enemies in America, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Maybe a national unity policy would do him well.
I think Saddam's regime would remain as stable as Syria, Iran and Algeria presently are due to the military nature of the regime. However, even Libya with its small, homogeneous yet tribal population rose up. So I assume Iraqis, too, have a tipping point - particularly if activists from neighbouring Iran orchestrate it among the Shiite population, and the same is true for Kurds in Iran and Turkey.
At any rate, Saddam does not sound like a man who would escape to the outside - he'd probably die fighting a civil war, or be victorious yet suffer from a huge destruction that leaves him vulnerable to foreign assault.
I think it's too early to judge what would happen in Iraq under him, as we still need to see whether the current people power wave will be able to penetrate regimes like Algeria, Syria, Iran and even Saudi Arabia as of yet. So far it has penetrated Libya, and the force with which authorities responded does not seem mouthable at all. I need to wait and see how other regimes hold on.