Those helpless and moot tiny and nearly silent people that we cannot assist without destroying them?
I don't know why that would be true.
What part isn't ? Pick one.
As for the efficacy of Bombing campaigns , they work really well where the enemy gathers up its resources , we can therefore keep the immoderate and violent scattered , which over a long term will make them look like looses , perception being very important in this situation , it is likely to work.
So, if we remove all support from moderates and bomb the countries, this plan is going to make them like us? less inclined to hate us? more reasonable? because the terrorists are going to look like losers? At no point is this plan making any sense at all.
I think we are already trying hard to avoid bombing the Moderates , would you like to finance the Moderates also? They get that , but we make a big show of it and it destroys their credibility .
Killing and capturing and chasing around should be reserved for the immoderate , and even for the immoderate leaving them alone would be nicer , as long as they are moderate enough to avoid shooting our way we don't need to reform them nor shoot them.
What about warfare is supposed to make sense? Warfare is the reverse of everyones preferred condition, it is naturally a state unfriendly to reason . Trying to conduct war gently is likely to result in greater casualtys than the conduct of war savagely , simply because the more tolerable it is ,the longer it can be withstood , the longer it will last. Counter intuitive results are so common that intuitive thinking is insufficient , actions should be examined with the real result in mind.
The Bombing of Germany during WWII was not intended to make them love us , I can imagine a milder bombing campaign coupled with a rewards program for moderate fascists , I don't imagine this working better .
