From what I could see of their actions, Saddam is extremely paranoid and did things primarily that ensured his survival. He surrounded himself with a thick layer of security and employed numerous doubles. If it meant his survival was threatened and no amount of thuggery could save him, he backed down every time. His military moves were childish and seemed to have no long-term planning to them. He behaves more like a schoolyard bully than a savvy world leader.

On the other hand Osama seemed to not mind martyrdom. From the stories I've heard of his days as a Mujahdeen fighter in Afghanistan against the Russians, he was fearless and often escaped by the tiniest of margins. He seems to me to be a better strategist and motivator of his followers. I've read of him doing humanitarian work in towns and villages in the Mideast as part of his recruiting strategy. He chose his targets not for the immediate effect (could do much more immediate damage to our economy by crippling oil refineries, nuclear power plants) but more for their terror and shock value and their long-term recruiting effects.

To me the guys are apples and oranges.