Joe,
Those points are interesting to consider, for sure.
And, you indirectly raise the other issue that all courses are not the same. I have no doubt private clubs can and should be the slower reveal type courses, and would be more likely to have caddies to assist, not to mention repeated playing experiences. By the same token regional mid level resorts and upscale publics, where the typical public player may play once a year for variety, doesn't know the course, and probably will never pick up on the subtly, may or may not benefit from either aiming points and no aiming points.
Speed of play and fun golf are still issues here, and every little bit helps. Is it technically great architecture IF you are designing for top level players? Maybe not. But, even top level players like the comfort of aiming points (and I have heard it from a guy usually ranked among the top10-20 golfers of all time as something he likes).
So, the question to me is do you give the customer/golfer what they want, and what the Owner may need (as a contributor somewhat to the bottom line, even if very small) or find some esoteric reason not to? The reasoning given here is that somehow, we know what's best for, or seemingly think players have it "too easy" when we all struggle with the game. I am not sure at all we can quantify the architectural benefit to the player of making them uncomfortable on the tee, when they prefer to be comfortable. Is golf a game, or is golf a battle of some sort?
I do agree with Pete that IF you want to make it more difficult for the top player, you take out aim points, a reason why his lake edges are always pretty straight to make it harder to pick a line. And, a reason I don't usually like target bunkers on the far side of cape holes either. As Ian says, play away on a Cape, and more distance and rough is usually enough of a penalty. It's just that I question if every shot should be designed to be harder? Even Mac, Bobby Jones, and others wrote that the purpose of hazards was to encourage players to make a shot, not make it harder.
Also agree that if you place a bunker past the LZ, maybe you ought to consider its depth for the better player, who because of distance and strength, would be playing a shorter iron out. Of course, you also have to consider that the poor player who hits it on his muffed second then hits the green in 4 instead of 3, which goes back to the speed of play issue, slowing down the slowest.
Long post, but the short answer, as always, is, "it depends on what is important to any particular design."