The reason that you will never see a "pro-war" rally of the kind that we just saw against the war is that the "pro-war" types ane not the kind that you can galvanize with slogans. They are not collectivists or socialist types. They tend to be more individualistic and iconoclastic.
That's not the kind that goes to mass rallies. They'll work quietly on their own for something they believe in but rarely will they join with the like-minded and march.
The anti-war protesters find their strength in numbers and use the fact of millions marching as proof of the rectitude of their position. With so many supporters, they must be right!
And then I recall the mass demonstrations that Mao used to stage.
Based on what I have read, seen and gotten from friends in Europe, the main sentiment there was not anti-war but anti-America. We are the big dog on the block and they are irrevalent on the world stage.
To conclude, the statement was made that only Rush and Hannity conspiracy theorises would believe that the proteses helped Saddam.
To the contrary, only the most naive would think that it did not.
The only thing that has gotten Saddam to cooperate the little bit that he has, has been the threat of force. Mobilize the troops and the inspectors are allowed back in. Put another carrier in the Persian Gulf and suddenly the Iraqi scientists are allowed to be interviewed. Etc, Etc.
Watch and see if his stance doesn't harden again by next week. You may say that it's not because of the protests but will you truly believe it?

troll