I too wonder if these strikes are very effective. I believe from what I have read and know that we have the capability to actually see (but not identify individuals) from satelites, drones or high flying aircraft and our ordinance is very accurate, but I believe a termination team on the ground (with proper support) would be more certain of success and possibly harm less civilians. But countries get really angry when you put troops on their land even when they are harboring terrorists. Perhaps this strike was effective; we should know soon. We did get one just last week. I imagine that the knowledge among terrorists that the USA can reach out and touch somebody anywhere may scare the hell out of them and deter some from acting.
Even back in 1966 when I went to the language school (DLIWC) in Monterey, CA I could have studied Swahili or a couple of other African languages and there were troops there doing that. In the US we train ttroops in all languages and have for decades. It's nothing new and indicates no intent to go to war in Africa.
The Muslims in Africa are for the most part not as fanatical as those in the Arab countries and the religion is not taken as seriously. Most of them are nominal Islamics and live very secularly. It's like being a Protestant in the USA. Remember that Islam came to Africa by conquest by Arabs for the purpose of slave trading and was assimilated into the basic African belief systems of the time. It is a strange type of Islam. Still, there are some there who are fanatics and need to be weeded out.
Africa is a pitiful continent. It has suffered from Imperialism and modern economic rape. It's people are poor, destitute and dying of AIDS by the thousands. IMO we should be helping them far more than the few billion per year we send there and spending far less on a war in Iraq.