The United States seems to constantly be involved in wars or interventions in the Middle East year after year after year. While the United States attempts to sell the same canard that we are involved in the Middle East for humanitarian reasons, for democracy, to counter terrorism, to neutralize weapons of mass destruction, the fact of the matter is, the United States is primarily involved in the Middle East for two basic reasons: oil and to keep the Middle Eastern trade routes free and clear of danger. The bottom line is that despite all of our interventions, all of our war materials and personnel, America never seems to resolve anything within the Middle East, ever. This would strongly imply that America needs to make a fundamental change in its Middle Eastern policy and its strategic planning.
The best way to address the changes that America needs to make in its Middle Eastern policy is to simply recognized the facts that are staring the United States in the face, which is the Middle East has oil, we, and our allies, and the international oil companies want it, or at least to have ready access to it, so consequently that should be the focus of our country and others that have the same vested interest. The United States does not need to pretend to be something that we are not, as we are the imperial power, unstoppable, unconquerable, and invincible. This means if our purpose is oil, we should be about our purpose, simple as that.
In any given country in the Middle East, the United States does not need to conquer that nation, to place a puppet in command, or to attack that country, none of that is even necessary. What is necessary is for the United States, either directly or through a "negotiation" to simply take over certain territorial parts of a particular Middle Eastern country so as to control the oil fields within certain regions of that country, and to leave the balance of the nation, as is. Of course, the foregoing implies strongly that America would be violating the sovereignty of these nations, but, in point of fact, the United States already does that; this suggestion simply makes it much more purposeful.
There is such a thing as the art of negotiation, and America has the best and most creative legal minds in the world, there isn't any doubt, therefore, that legal documents couldn't be drawn up in such a way, that certain parts and resources of certain countries would be leased or ceded to America for certain specific amounts of time and money, to which the treaty could not be broken, unless both sides of the equation agreed to do so.
You might argue that there would be howling about these somewhat "coerced" treaties all over the world, but in actuality, there wouldn't be. Those that would even consider howling would rather make a deal with the United States, than stand opposed against it as that is just plain pragmatism. America has all of the muscle, but apparently lacks the subtlety to carry out the most basic of objectives, because that oil is ours, already, it just happens to be located in the Middle East.