I'm struggling to see the logistics for this. The Twin Towers and the Pentagon were available targets because they are close enough to the flight paths for airlines that there would not be enough time to stop the planes between leaving the path and intersecting the building. The Pentagon is almost perfectly aligned with the runway of Ronald Reagan International, while Manhattan sits inbetween a mesh of flight paths for JFK, Newark and La Guardia.
The Eiffel Tower is not in such a position. The Flight path would be directed to either Charles de Gualle or Orly, most probably the former. In both cases, the flight path misses the centre of Paris by at least 10 miles, so more easily noticed.
Now we move on to the actual business of targetting the tower. I would think it most likely that to bring down any substantial section will require a direct strike on one of the corners, where the support is, and that any explosion will most probably only damage one support truss to the extent needed to cause critical failure. Theoretically, it might be possible to strike the section between floors two and three in such a manner as would cause an engine block to strike two trusses at once, but this would require a plane of the right dimensions (otherwise the wings would just be sheared off leading to the three sections crashing onto the opposite bank), and some very expert flying.
Striking the tower below the 1st floor is impossible without flying across half the city just above the rooftop level, and then attempting to cross the Champs de Mars at a mere 40m above ground level, avoiding the Tour Montparnasse in the process. Attempting to intersect the 1st floor can be ruled out for the same reason.
Attempting to strike between the 1st and 2nd levels or the 2nd level itself is more easily accomplished, but there is the possiblity that the top section does not collapse if the weight distribution altered by the damage is enough for the other three trusses to support.
Striking above the 2nd level is almost guarrenteed to cause the top to collapse, but will mean a much reduced death count, a harder task to target, and at least half the structure remaining standing.
Also to be factored in is that anything short of a near instantaneous severing of the topsection is going to mean that there are external staircases available for use in evacuations. Any strike at 2nd floor level or below is also going to leave at least one of these operational and potentially at least one lift.
And as has already been said, most of the fuel is going to leach away once it's burnt through the maximum of 2 floors/cielings that can contain it.
In short, I just can't see such an attack actually managing to be successful.
