Yes, carpet bombing does kill civilians...I worded that stupidly.
As far as it not doing anything in the past...two devastating nukes in Japan made them unconditionally surrender. Massive overwhelming power did it. The Japanese had far more balls than these pansy terrorists. They were a worthy adversary. Two very large bombs were the culmination for them to say "we had enough."
Germany had no fight left by the time allied forces made it there. The only reason that Germany did not surrender earlier is because Hitler was stil alive and his generals were scared. Germany was absolutely devastated by bombing. They didn't want anymore.
Carpet bombing of Hanoi was the only time we got the Vietnamese to the peace table.
I don't how how you say it did nothing in the past. Yes, you have to stand on the ground to hold it, but carpet bombing has proven its effectiveness...strategic strikes in and of themselves have not to the extent that unrestricted bombing has against a large force. Panama and Grenada don't stand out on the level of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Wars are won by pounding the enemy into submission and then holding the territory.
Actually the threat of overwhelming power did it. Tokyo suffered massive and overwhelming bombing already which they shrugged off, but the idea that we could destroy their cities easily is mostly why they chose to surrender.
What keeps the peace against forces of evil is the threat of overwhelming force, not necessarily the act. The act of force obviously makes the threat more credible, but credibility also requires credible means of force. Nuclear weapons, for example, are no longer credible except in a MAD scenario and we are not suicidal.
The other flaw in your argument is comparing the terrorists to the Japanese. The terrorists may well be "pansies" but the are unfortunately also much less disciplined. When the Japanese government surrendered, most of its fighters surrendered. With Muslim fanatics I don't think that would be the case.