What the Next Step in Iraq should be for US

I heard the Sunday morning news programs--again, F. Sakiria's program on CNN outstanding--and none carried hostile criticisms of what the US military, led by General Dempsey, is doing in Iraq!  Surprising.

They contained comments from participants to the effect that the US has no overall plan or strategy in the Middle East.  That to my mind is just wishful thinking, for critics often refrain from endorsing what this Administration is trying to accomplish there--namely, to establish governments that support their citizenry and create economic and social conditions for stability in the region; and friendly to the West.

Despite removing Maliki from political governance in Iraq, the new government in Baghdad is likely to remain favoring Shia (-Shiite) policies over and against the will of the Sunnis (supported in many ways by the Saudis).  This should continue the already heightened tension in Iraq among the three Islamic religious factions. 

By the US' arming the Kurds independently of the Baghdad regime, a way to bring about a stable federalist government among the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds, each governing its own Iraqi region, is emerging. As one analyst from Yale put it today (8/17/14) on one of the Sunday morning broadcasts, 'The Sunnis only are in the long run able to drive out the ISIS rebels, who must rely on Sunni internal support in order to carry out their religiously motivated mission in Iraq.'

In return for getting the ISIS out of Iraq, the Sunnis should be granted essential autonomy from the Shia-controlled government in Baghdad, turning that government into virtually a regional agency, though the conduit of national economic affairs.  Each regional government would have its own military.  Right now, the Sunni military, I understand, is coupled with the ISIS military force, which isn't all that bad because that link will be useful in turning around the situation in Syria.

Maybe, I should have listed this item under WHACKO-Theory!!