Let's save the Tomahawks and just throw money at the problem.

I read recently that cruise missiles of the type that were dropped on rural Afghanistan cost the American taxpayers 1.5 million USD each.
In the initial stages of the Afghan conflict, the US dropped thousands of these, and that was just the opening act of the Afghan conflict.

The point is that these missiles killed thousands more innocent people than the intended "bad guys" and totally destroyed what little infrastructure there was, in one of the least developed regions of the world.

The results of this approach were that "everyone hates Raymond", and Americans have to live with the knowledge of having totally messed up so many countries. The long term backlash will breed an entirely new generation of "terrorists", bent on destruction and retribution.

If this was the best plan the US could put together to stop "international terrorism" then trillions of dollars down the line after countless lives were lost, isn't it odd that the threat levels are at an all-time high? 

Clearly, it's not working. And they need to think of a new approach.

If a fraction of the money spent on Tomahawk Missiles (not counting money burned on troops and drones etc.) were to be utilized intelligently, America could actually come out on top.
I am just spitballing here.
If $100 dollars of every $1000,000 dollar wasted on those useless campaigns was spent on improving the lives of the Afghans. Things could look very different today.
If they didn't have Mr. Afghan man on the street's banking details or postal address, one could just shovel the money out of the bomb bays and drop it on the villages. Sent with an accompanying get well soon card.

And most of the money would land on civilians, anyway,  because that's how American weapons are calibrated. The few bills that land on Taliban and ISIS could be written up as acceptable collateral damage.

M Parak.
2015.