All of the things you are stating are adding onto the force part of the equation. I stated explicitly that that is a factor (Force/area means "force is a part of the equation"). Why are you suggesting that is important? I mean, it is important because it's a part of the equation, but it's not a surprising part of it.

As I said, running it through a simulator would give a reasonable approximation, I wasn't protesting that the airplane would have a force behind it. Indeed, I stated explicitly that it would. I even suggested that it might be enough if the force per unit area was sufficient when compared to the material strength differences, though the building would have a force per unit area as well. The winner is the one with the most force per unit area IF AND ONLY IF it can overcome the relative material strength.

What I was protesting in your response was that "straw going into a tree" was some sort of meaningful evidence. It's not. Well, it is, in that it shows what needs to be considered (force per area and material strength), but it's not in that an analysis of that event shows how unlikely it is (exactly the right angle, along the strength of the object, with the smallest point forward, etc.).