OK, you can use the argument that was worse because of Iran-Iraq war, but Americans on this forum would be uneasy about it, after all they were selling weapons to Saddam and sharing with him satelite photos.
Which is a wrong reason to feel uneasy about.
Americans supported Saddam after he started the war, because Iran was even worse. Their dictatorship is not one man's affair, death of any single individual in Iran leadership is not going to end it. Since the war has already started, what was making more sense - to let Iran win?
The other problem here is that as a general rule in stable dictatorship your chance of being murdered (by thugs hired by gov or freelance thugs) is actually dramatically lower than in unstable democracy (by freelance thugs), not mentioning countries that effectively turned in to a permanent war zones. (yes, you may use different metric, but I'm just pointing out that one metric here favours dictatorship) Additionally the less educated society the harder would be to achieve working democracy.
Working democracy can be achieved only by trying to achieve working democracy.
Just conserving a dictatorship can't avoid a (potentially bloody) mess when it eventually falls, and people try to live differently. It just postpones it.
In order to learn how to ride a bike you need to try it. Even if you fall repeatedly at first.