While you're at it, you can also ask him why he and a whole bunch of his fellow "neo-cons" are members of a group called the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, which has consistently criticized the Putin government for pursuing its own "war on terror" against radical Muslims in Chechnya.
There was one very beneficial but unintended aspect of the resultant conflict, i.e. the victory of the peaceful, democratic opposition-led by activist student groups like OTPOR, Western technocrats like Zoran Djindjic, and democratic Serbian nationalists like Vojislav Kostunica-over the autocratic heirs of Josip Broz (Tito).
The specified goal of the bombing campaign, i.e. stopping the slaughter of innocent Kosovars, was another noteworthy accomplishment, which has to be weighed against the negative consequences generated by that conflict-a military escalation that contravened the most basic principles undergirding this transatlantic defense pact.
To continue as a U.N. protectorate, a veritable political and economic basket case, open to infiltration by officially-sponsored Wahabbi clerics from the Gulf, and surreptitious invasion by Islamic terrorist organizations, is a situation that is simply untenable in the long run.
Instead of debating the relative merits of Clinton's decision to attack the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, I think that we need to focus on how best to solidify America's diplomatic/military relationship with a potentially invaluable ally in the WOT.
It is infinitely more desirable to have Kosovo follow the path trod by Albania, rather than becoming a charnel house of human misery, which is the current state of affairs in Chechnya.