The outcome will be the replacement of one Islamic government with another. With few exceptions, Islamic nations defer to Sharia law… which is intolerant, unforgiving, repressive, cruel, and advocates stealth and violence to achieve and maintain its tenets. each "new constitution" has a significant clause that allows Sharia Law to trump it (except Turkey… for the present). Democracy and Sharia are mutually exclusive.

Anything that is not Muslim is "infidel." Infidels have no rights. I agree with you, the West cannot effect a favorable outcome to Islamic conflict.

In the near future, we shall see that attempting a favorable (democratic) outcome in Iraq and Afghanistan will produce no lasting peace. No matter how we leave them, their cultural impetus is to return to Islamic life and all of its attendant cruelty. It would have been less costly in blood and resources, had we done nothing but conquer and depart… the remedy we effected for Saddam in Kuwait.

Therefore, my premise is that we should meet their expectations when we strike preemptively or in retaliation for the harboring and or exporting of terrorism. If they ignore our diplomatic warning… we should exact selective and meaningful destruction of infrastructure… while avoiding carnage.

Our military strategy should be to simultaneously drop eVeRY significant bridge (halt all motorized transportation) and simultaneously demolish eVeRY power station and switchyard (turn off utilities). This aerial/cruise missile campaign MUST be followed by dead silence on our part. No occupation… no nation building. 

ISLAM UNDeRSTANDS THIS PeRFeCTLY. I predict we would have to do this only once (do you remember Muammar Gaddafi?)