I’m going to wave the “BS” flag here. I used to FLY bombers for a living. To use “precision bombs”, you need to know EXACTLY where you want to hit, or have someone who knows the target and is illuminating it.
Add to that, the sheer number of possible “targets”, and even in such a fantastic scenario, they’d run out of bombs LONG before they ran out of “targets”. And, as we’ve learned in Afghanistan, the simplest way to get the locals to both hate you AND innovate all sorts of ways to kill you. . .is to bomb their homes.
So, kindly take your meds, and remember why the Japanese never even bothered to plan to invade North America: there’d be a rifle behind every blade of grass. . .
I think that Europe could muster enough bombs to do the job. Would New England, for example, have many resisters? I doubt it. Wyoming? Yes, but there's only about 600,000 people in Wyoming and nothing much worth taking. They'd probably seal it off and let it starve.
Yes, the best way to tick people off is to bomb them, but do you think that a multi-national force bent on forcibly disarming America would really care much what people thought of them?
The japs didn't want to try it 70 years ago, but times have changed. The technological advances that have been made are staggering. Things as simple as helmets and boots have improved dramatically, never mind the weapons and other warmaking equipment.
Again, this is all applying to a purely hypothetical scenario.