Here is an interesting analysis of how Sri Lanka defeated the Tamil Tigers.

The short version is that they ignore world opinion, and refused to make avoidance of civilian casualties a centerpiece of their campaign.

Note that these are legal under international law, which requires that non-combatants not be targeted, not that efforts be made to protect them from combat activities that legitimately target the enemy.

The post makes what I think is an error, in that it fails to distinguish between colonial conflicts, which include Iraq and Afghanistan, and internal civil wars, such as Sri Lanka.

Evidence shows that in an colonial conflict, these are precisely the most counter productive tactics.

As to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is where I look for an application of this principle, I think that conflict in the disputed territories is much more of a colonial conflict than a civil war, so these techniques would not be effective.