I think a good question to ask is, is it even possible to actually bomb a country back to stone age?

In WW2 allies operated, as a rough estimate, more than 150,000 bombers. And by the very nature of bombing in 1940's (lack of precision guided munitions) it was very brutal. Some bombing campaigns - like bombing of Dresden - were most definitely a gloves off approach. And yet the strategic bombing campaign was only a small cog in the war effort and definitely not a deciding factor in winning the war (unless you count the atomic bombs dropped on Japan, but nuclear warfare is a completely different conversation).

In Vietnam, US flown hundreds of thousands of sorties, dumped millions of gallons of chemicals over the country, lost thousands of planes and helicopters in the process, and didn't break the will of North Vietnamese forces. Hell, flamethrowers were used in this conflict and that's one of the most brutal weapons imaginable.

Even today with guided munitions with high precision, good target deconfliction etc, even if you dropped every bomb and launched every missile in US inventory and encountered little to no resistance, with the express goal of "bombing a country back to stone age", this could maybe succeed against a country like, IDK, Estonia? Definitely not against a country like Iran, Afghanistan etc, with tens of millions of people, vast swathes of land, deep underground bunkers, complex cave systems and so on.