To make a potentially long story short, I don't agree with you. I don't think Iraq's former aristocracy are resisting because their status is taken away. If that is their main concern, there is no reason to.
An aristocracy which owes its existance to a dictator is
never more inclined to accept a change of power that would disfavor them than the disenfranchised groups who have no power at all and therefore
have no choice but to acquiesce to any faction that is in power.
We're not talking about doctors and scholars and engineers in a moderate political climate who could be said to have achieved their aristocratic status by some degree of merit absent any relationship to the dictatorial regime. These are Hussein's tribal brothren - Sunnis - in a region that forms the most ardent support base for Hussein and the Baathist Party. They do not enjoy their status because of what they do, but
who they are.
This aristocracy literally enjoyed their status at the expense of the oppression of other disenfranchised Iraqis. The majority of Iraq is not Sunni - its Shiite.
Now what do you suppose would happen if the oppressive regime you profited from and supported is overthrown, and the new government not only threatens to be disproportionately represented by
THE VICTIMS of the oppression from which you profited, but to
exclude all ardent supporters (like yourself) of the old regime from a seat at the new government?
What would happen is that you would fear for your life if such a government became a reality, because a lot of people are going to want to talk to you about why their families had to disappear in the middle of the night just to keep you in a BMW.
That post-WWII thing worked out really well for Hitler's stongest support base, don't you think?
I think the resistance stems more from nationalism or religious principle.
In other regions of Iraq, perhaps, but not in that region.
As long as you don't let any facts stand in your way, you're free to 'think' whatever you wish.