I believe that America failed to realize how much the Sunni factions in Iraq had invested in Saddam's regime.

We see very low levels of violence in the northern Kurd areas and the southern Shia areas.

The main source of home grown terror is the sunnis. Not only do they attack coalition forces but now they have started slaughtering Kurds and Shias in the streets.

Most analysts seem to think the reason for the shift from attacking coalition troops to attacking iraqi civilians is to cause a civil war.

I say let them have it.

Thus far, we have tried our hardest to keep the shia and kurds from responding with violence, and they have.

I say we arm the Shia and Kurds and let them do our dirty work for us. They speak the language, they know the streets, and they're mad as hell. I feel they would do a better job prosecuting this war than we ever could.

Some people see civil war as the worst possible option, but in reality that isnt the case. Often times throughout history civil wars have corrected the wrongs of a country.

My guess would be that a civil war would last about a month as the sunni have no real power or control over the nation anyway. The Kurds and Shia backed by the Americans would quickly "rectify" the situation and put the Sunni in their place.. the place of a 20% minority in a democracy, not an overthrown aristocracy throwing a temper tantrum.

Well thats my small-minded opinion. Of course since it wreaks of the kind of real politik Americans arent willing to accept anymore and the media have built civil war up into the worst kind of disaster that could befall the country, it will never happen.

Any opinions on the "let them fight it out" opinion, or any alternate opinions?