You'd think so. But Resident Evil 5 still had a horrible inventory system despite being an otherwise good port. Unreal Tournament 3's menu system was crappy beyond belief on release. Even though they sorted it out later, it was never as good as UT 2004. Then of course there are the more relevant strategy examples, many of which are just horrible.
Simply put, there is no shortage of examples of crappy UIs and controls resulting from a game being a console port, mouse support or no.
But all of this is pretty irrelevant at the moment anyway.

And there are no shortage of PC-only games with crappy UIs and the like.
And there are just as many people who would argue that UT2k4 (which was PC- centric, to my knowledge) had a much crappier menu than UT (i still miss the simplicity of UT's approach).

Its got a fucking awful inventory system on the 360 version too (then again it suits the rest of the game).

The difference between poor design decisions and lazy porting should be obvious enough.
I know there's room for improvement with JA's interface. But we have no info on console ports, UI overhauls, et cetera.

Yeah. It generally tends to be obvious in the sense of "Oh, it was on a console? ALL HORRIBLE DESIGN!! HOW DARE THEY TAINT MY GAME!!" and the like. :p
Seriously. Wait until we know more before you start blaming the consoles. This game can just as easily be screwed up if it is PC-exclusive (look at all the spiritual successors :p) as if i were console-exclusive.
And, like I said, turn-based strategy is actually one of the genres consoles tend to get pretty good. I have heard great things about the Civ for consoles, and I can vouch for Warhammer 40k: Squad Command being a good game on the PSP.

I was going to make a hilarious image of the Jagged Alliance 2 box with a "CONSTANT ERECTION REQUIRED" warning, but had no idea how to work an image editor.

I would get it.

No, more in the sense that it worked on consoles and not on PC. That's the difference. if it was also shit on console then it's sloppy design. Understand now? Or should I take it slower?
See? Both of us can be condescending, but it doesn't really get anyone anywhere, does it? So give it a rest.

But the problem is, most of the more vocal "Consoles ruin everything" people tend to also think games are inherently bad on consoles. Can you see the conundrum?

Arulco looks a lot more sandy.

Only if such opinions are actually stated. A consistent problem with you that I've noticed is your tendency to misrepresent someone's opinion you disagree with as being drastically broader in scope and intensity than they've actually expressed.
Maybe you're just too used to sites where gamers express very generalised and polarised opinions. Which does, after all include 90% of gaming sites on the net. Which is one of the reasons I stick around here. You don't get that so much here.
My first comment on this thread was to do with the likelihood of the game appearing on PC at all.
Publishers only tend to hush up the intended platforms if one is being left out (usually the PS3 and/or PC). That's where my real concern lies. That this will be marketplace fodder only sold in the currency known as MS points.
Yes, UI and controls are potential issues too. But first I'd like to know for sure that it's even hitting the PC. Then we can fuss over the details.

A consistent problem with you that I've noticed is your tendency to misrepresent someone's opinion you disagree with as being a completely different argument.
Take a look at when I started responding to you
http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/gentlemen_get_your_boners_ready_jagged_alliance_2_reloaded/perm=13/#p_b_13
You started saying that it was bad that this game might be on consoles and started saying that turn-based games wouldn't work on consoles. I pointed out one that I feel works nigh perfectly (one could also argue FF: Tactics and those Fire Emblem thingies).
So please do not try to change the context of my statements in an effort to avoid the topic at hand.
If it weren't for my complete abhorrence of people who parrot the one or two words they learned in debate class, I would probably reference a batman villain who was recently portrayed by Cillian Murphy. I am sure it would be an awesome and entertaining reference that would likely seem irrelevant to most people, but it would still be a reference. But, like I said, I have a complete abhorrence for people who just parrot the one or two terms they learned in debate class, so I just leave it with this even more complicated and nonsensical reference so that I feel better :p

Here's the official word on JA2: Reloaded:
http://www.jaggedalliance.com/index.php?id=13&no_cache=1&L=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=19&cHash=e380ecc9105b136f2f962221f2b0af6d
and
[url=http://www.bit-composer.com/www_en/newsarchive.aspx?newsid=ce4c7580-4e16-452d-a709-14d05401876b
Huh? What about Supreme Commander 2?
Hopefully JA3 will come after this, indeed... The Online game + this remake can give a bit of exposure for the forthcoming of JA3.

Turn based games can and have worked on consoles very successfully. A lot of JRPGs and similar rely heavily on turn based combat. But these were developed from the ground up for consoles or handhelds and are often exclusives to those systems for a good reason - they aren't easy to port.
Again, you're misrepresenting my point by making it seem broader than it actually was. I've only just pointed this out and you're doing it again immediately.