I would be comfortable using the supine for matters of destroying, but certainly not for standing for or against something. Now, I see destruction as a definite move toward an end, as the end is the removal of some noun x; true, destruction is not an end to action, as things cannot be destroyed once and for all, but I think that the intentional dimension ought not be overlooked. The goal is to end at some definite point, i.e. a world in which x no longer exists- I interpreted the usage as being one of a contracted purpose clause of the form 'I perform (action) in order to destroy object x (v for the sake of arriving in a world in which x no longer exists).' I believe that destruction is a verb that implies duration, and thereby movement from the incipience to the 'end;' as the song goes,
"The time is with the month of winter solstice
When the change is due to come.
Thunder in the other course of heaven.
Things cannot be destroyed once and for all.
Change returns success
Going and coming without error.
Action brings good fortune.
(Pink Floyd magne amo- compulsionem nec obsistere potui!)
If my interpretation is too loose, though, and it very well may be, the supine might had best be reserved for verbs that indicate basic movement of an agent from one place to another...or special cases like verbs of thinking or believing.