BRTD - I laugh at your characterization of the Kosovo War as a humanitarian mission. If it was a humanitarian mission, then so is the Iraq War. We attacked a country and removed a government from power, effectively. Somalia was a humanitarian mission, but Kosovo was a war. And it was against a country that was no threat to us. Why are not as vehemently opposed to it as Iraq? This war was done at the behest of the Europeans, who convinced a reluctant American administration to carry most of the weight in the war because they didn't want that nasty business going on in the back yard. I recognize that the US is the largest single country in NATO, yet the European countries combined are at least as big as the US. So then why is it that the US must make most of the military contribution?
Kosovo was an intervention into a single province, with reports of genocide going on. No government was removed. Milosevic was not removed until about 2 years later in a popular uprising by his own people. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Kosovo action, as his popularity actually increased during that time. It is much closer to Somalia than Iraq. It's actually much closer to Clinton's bombing of Iraqi military bases than anything else, since that's about all that happened. If you honestly think Milosevic fell because of the Kosovo War then I believe you are incorrect.
The Serbian government was no threat to other European countries either. You make it sound as if the Europeans were begging the US to come in to save them from Milosevic, when in fact no direction action against Milosevic was even taken as stated above.
As for your comments about the US having to take all the brunt and all that, you make it sound like that was a lot. How many US soldiers were killed in Kosovo?
I also love how you completedly ignored my opebo/religion, me/suburbs analogy. Come on, if all Europeans and American leftists are such rabid America haters, why not be as open about it?