The Media gets a vote. Warden doens't include this at all in his theory and assumes that you can conduct your application of effects in a vacuum of broader scrutiny and political context. The Colonists will play the "underdog card" and ensure that the British are portrayed in the media as evil, jackbooted nazis because they are DELIBERATELY ignoring your military forces and conducting political assassination and brutal destruction of your civil infrastructure. Buy the PLO playbook and add Christien Amanpour and Anderson Cooper to speed dial. Play up that "good guys" use their military to attack the other guys military ONLY and that means there can be on other characterization of the British other than EVIL.
An example of what you described occurred during the recent Northern Waziristan attack that killed 40 with unmanned aircraft missiles. The Pakistanis promptly halt talks with the U.S., saying it was a meeting to discuss chromite mining between elders and Taliban. Unspoken was that the Taliban were attempting to tax the mining operation to gain funds for Afghan combat operations.

So in theory, it may have been a legitimate target, however, the elders representing the mining operation were no doubt under pressure to give up funds to the "good Taliban"...or else. This is a classic example where aerial ISR alone, and SOF/CIA operations alone are insufficient to gain the total picture. Innocent or CLAIMED innocents are brought into many an aerial attack situation if insufficient aerial ISR is all that is available without a parallel context of ground forces fusing their information with that of the UAS operator.

To counter Slapout's point that SOF/CIA/JTACs are sufficient, Bin Laden was able to escape because we had so few troops on the ground that even when calls came to reinforce the Tora Bora area, those ground forces were not available. Even with ample ground forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, it was not until the surge that we were fully able to cover all affected areas and threats. Small teams are insufficient when the insurgent can simply move elsewhere.

Today we see the successful use of cruise missiles and three B-2 bombers to attack air defenses and airfields. So why do we need a huge USAF when we have these asymmetric capabilities...and no place to launch lots of fighters and tankers from near China outside TBM range?

In addition, we see Admiral Mullen saying that Qaddafi's overthrow is not the objective. So guess my question is how is this different than the last Northern Watch/Southern Watch that lasted a decade without ousting Hussein or suppressing ground operations?