The Word of "Jihad"

Two purposes are considered for it: first, is to defend Muslim communities against enemy invasion (based on the right of self-defense) like NATO. Second, is to fight to save the victims, like an attack to Libya in 2011 which was done to rescue the victims. 
Which groups of victims do deserve to have jihadi support? 
Islamic history has indicated that all of those who are under the unbearable political, social and economic terms are among the victims. Therefore, the victims' population is not only limited to war-affected people. 
What is the strategy to rescue the victims? There is no doubt that if "violence" is the only fight method to rescue the victims, then the possibility to save the victims of Gaza and child labor will not be available. Gaza victims need to rebuild Gaza not the gun. The victims of child labor need security, feed, clothing, housing and education. They are victims of the "harsh conditions". "Violence" can punish offenders or force the enemy to withdraw, but do "weapons" have such a function regarding "harsh conditions" as well?! 
The Muslim community must make a choice between the two options: first, avoid fighting to save the victims and second, the development of jihadi tools. 
Even if the Islamic world does not recognize the "clinical jihad", the Middle East victims will not be alone. But its consequences will be the gradual expansion of humanism in the Islamic East. For example, the millions of Arab refugees have not received any support from the Arab-Muslim states of the region but the world would not abandon them. Thousands of Syrian refugees have been accepted in the United States (in spite of the long distance), but none of the refugees has been accepted by the Saudi government or its Arab allies. And while Iran has accepted more than 3 million Afghan refugees who had fled Taliban and terrorism.