It's getting closer. (Then again, I'm sorta of the belief it's been an unofficial civil war for sometime.)

But here's a contrarian idea...

Is a civil war all that bad? Yes, it's ridiuclous and shameful that it ever came to this, but perhaps a civil war would be the equivalent of "pulling off the band-aid quickly", unlike the current course, which seems to result in nothing but slow murder and madness.

Now, I don't know much more about the situation other than what I read in the papers, but I believe the Shiites would essentially mop the floor with the Sunnis in the event of open fighting. There are 3.5 Shiites for every 1 Sunni, and the Shiites have U.S. equipment, (some) U.S. training, and (possibly) the Kurds on their side. They also don't have to worry about foreign terrorists stabbing them in the back because they're not killing enough "infidels" for Allah and all that holy war garbage.

The U.S. could go to the borders, seal them off, and let everyone else fight it out. Then we pick up the pieces and start over. Like I said, this never should have come to pass had the initial post-war been handled in any sort of competent manner, but still, it's worth examining whether Civil War=apocalypse.