it is stopping the ethnic cleansing by Milosevic. Another argument for U.S. involvement is that the air strikes against the Serbs will dampen their spirits and attacks against the Albanians. A third argument for U.S. involvement is that it will stop from drawing in other surrounding countries into the war. (1) The first argument for U.S. intervention is easily refuted. The U.S. diplomats believe that the U.S. is benefiting the situation in Kosovo by intervening. The US's main goal in Kosovo is to stop the ethnic cleansing conducted by Milosevic. The manner in which the U.S. is trying to resolve this conflict is wrong. The U.S. began bombing villages and towns in which ethnic Albanians live. This drove out the Albanians and forced them to immigrate to other countries. It seems that the United States believes that ethnic cleansing is wrong, but bombing innocent people is acceptable (Landlay 1). The Serbs are using the NATO air raids as a way to kill the ethnic Albanians. The Albanians are being used as shields as the NATO forces bomb the Serbs. On one occasion, in the city of Kamena Glava, five hundred Albanian men were killed ("Atrocity"5). The Serbs are using NATO forces against what they are fighting for. U.S. involvement in Kosovo would be more welcomed if they weren't killing innocent people and instead, helping them come to a peaceful resolution between the two areas. However, the air strikes against Serbia are believed to be Clinton's goal for protecting U.S. investors and exporters. Although the humanitarian tragedies of Kosovo are in the foremost eye of the public, U.S. economic interests are in foremost eye of the government (Landlay 2). The second argument for U.S. intervention can also be refuted. Air strikes are proven to be ineffective in winning a war. This fact has been proven many times in other wars such as World War II and Vietnam. On the contrary, however, air strikes often stiffen the will to resist, as was the case i...
