What are the long term impacts of a "Korea like" presence in Iraq?

One of the fascinating things to me about the discussion of a permanent/long term "Korea like" presence in Iraq is that all the arguments on both sides seem to look at Iraq as if it is in a vacuum. Yes, the arguments are made about Iran and the Saudi oil fields, but very little deference is paid to the larger problem of "hearts and minds," the root and soul of America's terror problem.

While an extended presence in Iraq may in fact allow a launch point against both state actors and non-state movements in the region, at the same time, the US presence will generate the perception of an imperial power imposing itself on the Islamic world which will create more anti-American sentiment from which more terrorists will grow.

I guess the question is, how do you balance that equation? Is that forward presence worth an increase in the number of Al Qaeda members? Which is a greater national security interest, an ascendant Iran, or more terrorists focused on the US? In the broader terrorism balance sheet, is the payoff worth the cost?

This president often likes to say that he wants to take the fight to the terrorists, that he wants to be "on the offense," but there's a backside to that strategy. Teams that focus on offense often give up goals, and in this game that could mean American lives on American soil.

I don't have an answer to this. I just wanted to broaden the discussion a little. For all the talk of Iraq being a part of the war on terror, there seems to be very little appreciation of the broader resonances.