This could lead to a terrorist state in the middle of the middle east, one that bordered all the major players, both our enemies and allies. We are not the only ones affected, but we will eventually be affected. An Iraq in the hands of an Al-Quaeda type regime might not be a conventional military threat to its neighbors, but it would threaten the whole world. This is infinitely worse than what we replaced; a vicious individual dictator, but one that was secular and, after the first Gulf war, no threat to anyone except his own people.

You're right, the people there want no part of us, but they don't want these fundamentalist thugs in charge either. The only way we can keep the lid on this is to keep a large occupying force in country indefinitely, like we have had there for the last decade. This is, of course, no longer possible; in fact, it never was, as Obama realized before he was even elected, and as the Neocons can't seem to realize at all.

Our best and worst fear is that at its root, the conflict in the middle east is fundamentally religious, with some national components as well. We are not really involved, or at least, we weren't before. I suppose at one time we felt it was essential to get involved in the Islamic world's business because of our energy dependence. We had troops and bases there, picked sides in local squabbles, allied with the biggest scapegoat (Israel). Other power centers, like Russia and China, who have no direct stake here, will continue to stir up trouble simply because it keeps us bogged down, which is always in their best interest.

This is going to be the 21st century's Cold War. Except this time, we're not facing a cold and calculating ideological opponent with clear goals, but a fanatic and reckless religious one who doesn't know what he wants, and one whose own house is deeply divided, Sunni vs Shia. We should never have gone into Iraq the 2nd time (I still think the Elder Bush handled the first Gulf war brilliantly, achieving our goals but quickly withdrawing without causing a whole new set of problems).

But the occupation of Iraq resulted in a sequence of events that we should have foreseen would lead to unforeseen consequences. It was foreseen, all right, but not by our leaders. You never know just what will happen when you kick a hornet's nest, but you should know that something will happen. Still, that's the past. That was then, this is now. How we got here is no longer relevant, provided we don't make the same mistakes again, which I'm afraid we are about to do.

My suggestion. Get out of the middle east. Help our allies if they ask for it, but don't send troops. I'm not opposed to intervention in principle, but it is impossible to predict what the situation will eventually evolve into. Until it stabilizes, it is unwise to commit to any particular action or plan. Just because you can influence an outcome doesn't necessarily mean you can manage it to your benefit. Sometimes, as we never seem to learn, we just make it worse.