Killing enemy leaders works. It may not be highly effective, but I cannot think of any good reason to pass up the opportunity.
By this statement Wilf, are you saying that going after leadership is always worth the squeeze, even if it turns out to not be highly effective?

At what point is a leader's death worth 1, 10, 100 civilian casualties? Not trying to apples and orange this issue, but this does go back to a potential collateral damage issue that I think always needs to be thought of.