>>/54317/
The authors talk briefly about assassinations. Sometimes these happen, the US make attempts, some are successful some aren't, they train groups that potentially can execute these. In itself it is not a policy tool, but can be included into others. There were plans to make it institutional (create official CIA branch a "Health Alteration Committee"...) but these were discarded supposedly and they are careful that neither US Presidents and top decision makers never presented with written or explicit oral proposals.

Couple of things to close hostile interventions.
Numbers.
Covert: 7 successes - 17 failures 
- coups: 5 success vs. 3 failures
- exile raids: 1 success vs. 8 failures
- internal armed movements: 1 success vs 6 failures
Overt: 9 successes, 4 failures
- bombing: 1 success vs 1 failure the success is debatable tho
- proxy assistance: 3 success vs 2 failures
- invasions: 5 success vs 1 failure I think they lumped large-scale combats and invasions together
Summed up: from 37 hostile interventions 16 succeeded and 21 failed.
It seems overt interventions when the US herself goes into action are more successful. However there is a clear contrast between the coups and other interventions. The authors differentiate between non-military and military operations. Coups being the non-military, succeeded 5 times vs 3 failures, and all the rest are military with 11 successes and 18 failures, which means the non-military routes more often reach their goals. The book makes a point here that in client interventions again non-military responses work better. And again, the US herself has a better chance to get to the desired outcome, when they turn to use proxies.
My impression is that the US uses proxy forces either when the situation is dire, or when a proxy force is available and with low cost they can cause some inconveniences to US enemies. The US seems to not care what happens with these proxy forces. They treat them like this:
> they know the risks and they volunteered to do it, who are we to stop them, and with our help they have a better chance than without anyway so we do good to them

see picrel for more text