Military Solutions in Iraq

Iraq is a mess and we are sending more troops. Democrats are so cowed by the fear of being labeled as defeatist that most of them seem content to let it happen. Fine. We are going to fight this war until we “win.” Winning would be a secure and stable government that can control it's borders and decide it's own destiny. If this situation was true today in Iraq our troops could come home tomorrow. Creating this environment in Iraq can be achieved in Iraq with military power. All that is necessary is to chose a side. Freedom, liberation and democracy are all fine concepts for Americans. The administration has made it very clear however, that foreign people don't qualify for the same rights and protections we grant ourselves. Guantanamo, secret prisons, trials without representation, and “aggressive interrogations” have shown the world that our government will protect the rights of Americans by violating the rights of others. Free from applying our principles to the needs of the people of Iraq a solution for the crisis becomes much easier to find.
Saddam Hussein kept order in Iraq even though he was a member of and was biased to, the Sunni minority. The Shia represent over 70 percent of the population but maintained their sub servant position in Iraq out of fear of the Bathe regime. Iraq maintained peace with itself even through a war with Iran. For all the horrors that Saddam inflicted on the people of Iraq, he knew how to keep security and stability within his boarders. Perhaps the United States should use it's military might to reinstall a new Bathe dictator. Iraq would be as it was before Saddam lost power and the streets of Iraq would be quiet once more. The screams and blood would be pushed back into the torture chambers where the world would not be bothered by it. Iran will be happy to have peace on its' border and since Iran is predominantly Shia they will be happy to have this faction in power. Problem solved, except that vast majority of the Islamic world is Sunni, including Al Qaeda, and we would be responsible for the violent suppression of the majority of people in Iraq.
We could pick the other side in this conflict. The Government of Nori Al Maliki is representative of the Sunni majority. The Mahdi Army, lead by Moqtada Al Sadr, controls much of the countryside already and the level of violence rises and fall at his whim. Show that we support his goals of power over the country, help Sadr suppress any Shia fighters and peace and stability again falls onto the streets of Iraq. After all, the Bathe party has all been disrupted and destroyed. Also, thanks to Sadr death squads, the ratio of Sunni to Shia populations is now even higher. Problem solved, except that we might have to go to war with Shia dominated Iran by giving Iraq to the Sunnis. We are also giving a victory to Sunni dominated Al Quaeda. Remember the terrorist that hate and want to kill us? Supposedly that was what all this was about in the first place. There's also the matter of the violent suppression of the Shia minority that our government promised would have representation in the new Iraq after the invasion.
The third option is to place our troops on every street corner of Iraq and ask everyone nicely not to keep trying to kill each other. This seems to be the essence of our military strategy for the last couple of years. It hasn't been working. A sitting army without a clear goal is an army with a target on its' back. So much for the military options. Pick a side or leave. These are not the options that we would like to have, but they are the options we are left with. Leaving Iraq will not bring “victory.” What it will bring is a stop to the violence against our own troops and it will eliminate the need for us to choose one side or the other. Is this a good option? Is it a better option than those ideas just put forward? Leaving now will leave blood on our hands, but in terms of winning or loosing, I would rather we lose with dignity than win stealing the tactics of Saddam Hussein.