As vile as Hussein is, he's correct.

Under international law and the U.N. Charter, the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq by "coalition" forces is illegal.

Resolution 1441 did not explicitly authorize the use of force. In fact it was only unanimously passed after former U.S. U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte assured the Security Council that it contained "no hidden triggers" for military action. Thus the resolution was passed merely stating that Iraq would face "serious consequences" if the council decided its weapons declaration contained "false statements or omissions" and if Iraq failed to cooperate with inspectors. The resolution didn't describe those consequences and the Security Council never acted further.

W pointed to Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 as additional precedence to use military force. 678, adopted in 1990, preceded the first war and authorized the use of "all necessary means" to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait and - important for current events - "to restore international peace and security in the area." 687, adopted shortly after that war ended, imposed economic sanctions and called on Iraq to surrender biological, chemical or nuclear weapons and related materials, among other demands.

The U.N. Charter only permits the use of force for two reasons: self-defense and when the Security Council authorizes action to counter a threat, typically understood to be imminent. It's ridiculously easy to argue that since Iraq never attacked us and there were virtually no caches of WMD found in Iraq, 678 and 687 worked and there was no need to invade as Iraq had no WMD and and no ability to disrupt "international peace and security in the area."

With that in mind, the war and outcome were both illegal and Saddam Hussein is still the rightful leader of Iraq, whether you like it or not. He's a terrible man, no doubt, but the law is the law. And that's also why he's being tried in Iraq rather than before the World Court where those like Milosevic have faced justice. In front of the World Court, there would be a very real possibility that Hussein's ousting and capture would be ruled unlawful.