Funny, the BBC recognises the symbolic importance of the al-Askari shrine - not as a functional building, but as a symbol of belief - and notes the effect it can have and the problems of a civil war now being faced.
But the attack on the WTC in the US was also a symbolic attack, and wars were the (intentional) result. One rule for one layer of the fractal diplomacy, another rule for a different layer.
"Civil war could lead to the break-up of the country, and would export even more instability and violence across the wider Middle East and beyond."
Why can we only think on the size of national borders?