his particular corner is his thing. And even people one might suppose would be in his particular corner could happily see him out if it brought more stability.
I am thinking the US shouldn't really go to bat for this guy. Retired General David Petraeus is skeptical about what we would be doing, acting as a potential Air Force for Shia Militias. It would only deepen the division between areas that have become militarized. That doesn't seem conducive to bringing about peace.
If our interest in setting things right, or at least, more stable, in Iraq, had to do with peace. I am thinking it has to do with oil fields a little bit more, and I think even Obama is kind of saying so.
This is the dumbest reason ever to try and determine how any people should be governed though. Remember when Saddam set the oil fields ablaze during what we would call the first Gulf War (not, apparently, pretending we know bugger-all about the Iran-Iraq War, I guess)? Well, this is a thing ISIL might try.
I have a crazy idea--what if government control of regions was basically local and representative, and outsiders didn't try and manipulate outcomes for economic reasons?
I know that might go over like a lead thing that is in no way designed for over-going, but I thought I might put it out there.