The third option is the punitive expedition. Simply put, we could have hit the Afghans hard, destroyed as much of the country as possible in as short a time as possible, and warned them that if they messed with us again, we'd be back in force to finish the job. We'd have left the countryside in ruins and created a humanitarian disaster, but we'd also have let the world know that were were not to be trifled with. The example of this paradigm occurs throughout history, from the Greek's destruction of Troy, Alexander's destruction of Thebes, Rome's destruction of Carthage, Jerusalem and the various tribal strongholds of northern Europe, and various other atrocities. Of course, the survivors would hate us, but they would also fear us, and, as Machiavelli famously wrote, it is better to be feared than loved. Also, given the nature of our enemies, they'd have understood and expected this response, as it is what they would have done if the roles were reversed. The rest of the world would have screamed bloody murder, but let's face it, they were going to do that no matter what we did.