Negroponte tried to focus on progress in Iraq, but he acknowledged a civil war would be a "serious setback" to the global war on terror.

"The consequences for the people of Iraq would be catastrophic," he said. "Clearly, it would seriously jeopardize the democratic political process on which they are presently embarked. And one can only begin to imagine what the political outcomes would be."

Saudi Arabia and Jordan could support Iraq's Sunnis, Negroponte said. And
Iran, run by a Shiite Islamic theocracy, "has already got quite close ties with some of the extremist elements" inside Iraq, he added.

While Iraq's neighbors "initially might be reluctant" to get involved in a broader Sunni-Shiite conflict, "that might well be a temptation," Negroponte said.

I was wrong, there actually is a worse scenario than the ones that I normally consider, and Negroponte describes it. I don't think this is a likely result, at least not an overt one, but a proxy fight a la the Spanish Civil War? That seems entirely plausible.

The civil war is happening and going to escalate. We don't have the troops on the ground to pull off an actual occupation and shut it down. The only questions now are, how big, how long and how are we going to get out of the way?