Note: Whether the crime is committed against another automomous state or against an internal population is irrelevant.The concept is:
The leaders of the offending country (whether elected or not) are not the progenitors of their actions. It is the social structure which supports, condones, encourages or even condemns those actions which is the responsible party ... the originators are the "allowers".
Even if the society vigorously denounces the actions of its own leadership (an uncommon occurence since most such instances involve a totalitarian state) it is responsible because it "allows" the condition to persist for the time that it takes to put a stop to it. To say they are not responsible is to say they have no control over those leaders.
No one ever headed up a mass atrocity without the general population at least "looking the other way". If, in fact, they do oppose, the actions will cease ... one way or another. The mechanism of cessation is is an excellent example of what I am talking about. If the second in command sees that the action of the number one leader is vigorously opposed by the population, he knows he has a "warrant" to kill number one and take over. If no such opposition exists, his hands are tied since it is the men with the guns (the army) who must support that warrant. They will not do so unless it is plain to see that "number one" is on the way out.
With this understood ...You can now see whom to attack and how to attack if you are another country trying to stop the inappropriate actions by external methods. Blowing up bridges and airports and TV stations isn't going to cut it.
One must attack the warranters themselves ... the people.
Note: All the smart weapons technology is great for defeating an army but it's comparatively useless against those not engaged in a "stand up" fight. They can just put "human shields" everywhere and negate any smartness at all.And this is where the United States fails in wartime scenarios. Its culture is dominated by the philosophy of Jesus which is the most effeminate ever devised. We are impotent when confronted with the inevitablility of killing innocent people. It's not allowed.
At least not directly.
The Judeo-Christian ethic allows one to kill as many people as you like as long as their deaths are secondary effects.
[ Every city has some sort of death rate all things being considered. Wreck it to some extent and that death rate will climb by a corresponding amount. ]Thus, by destroying the infrastructure of Serbia many collateral-secondary deaths will occur but we can say self-righteoulsy that we didn't do it. They brought it upon themselves.
Thus, as Jesus has said:
Without it's effeminate philosophy the USA could simply employ "tit for tat" and the matter would have been resolved long ago.
In this manner ...Drop leaflets on Serb cities stating that their cities would be bombed in a fashion corresponding to their bombing of civilians in Kosovo. No smart bombs. Just random city explosions. Thus, the warranters are attacked in the same manner they have warranted.
Specifically,But the United States cannot do this because Jesus only allows the killing of civilians ... indirectly. We cannot kill babies directly by blowing them up ... only by depriving them of normal care which is made unavailable because the bridge is blown away and mama couldn't get to the hospital (also blown up).
The value of life ...Much will be made of the value of human life but don't you think a bridge is worth something too? These objects are created at great expense (and loss of life) so that people can live in some semblance of security and comfort in an ever more complicated civilization. A culture may recover from a few deaths in a very short time ... but the loss of a huge bridge may take decades. It affects everyone.
Random bombing might kill a few thousand people before they give up their "bad behavior" but I'm quite sure it would be less damaging that what is going on now. (And cheaper too).
Anyway, even though our remedy to Kosovo is misguided in it's specifics, at least we're "mixing it up" with the bad guys. To just let it be would only encourage more of the same in the future elsewhere.
The United States is for better or worse ...
(and everybody knows it)