If it's a fairly small group in charge of a herd, or it's possible to convince the enemy that they're defeated when they've lost, then bombs do the trick. Lots of examples of that.

If it's an ideology or most of the group is out to get you for whatever reason and defeat is seen as something that needs to be nurtured, cherished, and avenged even if it's 200 years later, then bombs are a harder way to win victory. Not that "winning hearts and minds" works either. There's a reason that genocide rates in areas with small tribes with strong loyalties were so high. Over a hundred years, genocide yields a lower body count than intermittent warfare that rejects genocide.

For ideologies and such, it's best to just put up a big wall of some sort and hope that the animosities die down or that equal coexistence becomes possible. (Unequal coexistence is usually possible, and while it lets people live eventually they realize life isn't the goal of human life.) Usually takes a rather large cultural or ethnic shift for that to happen: Nobody wins, but one side decisively loses to time.

The priorities of our "leaders" are not America's priorities.

When enough people get that, things will change - but it's going to be an ugly revolution because the powers-that-be won't abandon their gravy train without a fight.