To put it plainly, NATO's bombing of Serbia cannot be compared with the one of Libya, and neither can it be compared with the NATO's ongoing plans involving Syria.
In connection with Serbia, NATO came into the scenario after a very long time, giving enough opportunity to Slobodan Milosevic to kill, rape and displace 2 million Bosnians and Kosovars. The situation in Bosnia became much too precarious by 1998 when hundreds of thousands of Kosovar Muslims began pouring into no-man's land in Europe, fleeing Milosevic's ethnic cleansing, with no food, no water, no electricity and no sanitation. The heart of Europe began looking like the heart of Africa in crisis. That's when the European leaders woke up and along with their North American partner decided that something needed to be done to stop Milosevic, NOT for the purpose of protecting the Mulsims of the Balkans (who were being butchered randomly) but for protecting Europe and preventing the political instability from spilling over because of Milosevic's ethnic cleansing.
At this point the NATO member countries had two choices:
1) Either NATO must intervene to stop Milosevic's blood thirsty mission. OR
2) The arms embargo to be lifted from Kosovo and Bosnia who must be allowed to officially have an army, acquire weapons and defend themselves.
Obviously the EU and US chose the former. They feared that lifting the arms embargo from the Muslim community of the Balkans would not be a good idea. It could make them feel brave, confident and bold. They might no longer accept being bullied and looked upon as third class citizens of Europe. The EU and US decided upon NATO to intervene BUT there was a careful plan behind it. NATO bombing of Serbia would be surgical to the utmost, and to the very minimal so that it could be finished as early as possible. Unlike Libya, where more than a dozen cities and towns were raised to the ground, countless number of private and government properties destroyed beyond recognition and the civilian death toll being well into five figures .... NATO's bombing in Serbia killed very few civilians (350 according to the exaggerated version of online Wikipedia), bare minimal of military casualties and much to my disappointment, I never read of the killing of any Chetniks during the air raids who had their hands drenched with blood. NATO mainly bombed the roads and bridges connecting Serbia with Kosovo to disrupt the communication links between these two provinces and thus largely avoided the risks of casualties. NATO also used these airstrikes for another discreet purpose, to hit at the Chinese embassy in Belgrade which killed three Chinese reporters and injured 20 embassy staff including diplomats. NATO claimed it was a mistake but how come NATO took such good care of keeping all Serbian government bodies safe? A couple years later, some Serb supporters claimed the use of depleted uranium in Serbia by NATO. That turned out to be false after a thorough investigation by the United Nations Environment Programme, and a copy-cat claim after news got around by the start of the new millennium that approximately 1.5 million has perished in Iraq due to the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus by the US forces during the 1990 attack on Iraq followed by terse sanctions resulting in the inavailability of essential medication.
Subsequently when Milosevic was captured, he was conveniently handed over to the Hague where he would forever loll in a luxury prison cell .. a man who had killed many more of his countrymen in just 5 years than Gaddafi could even dream of killing in 40 years!
NATO's thuggery is restricted within the Muslim world only, NOT in Europe.
I wish a lot of us had better insight than comparing the Serbians with the Libyans or Syrians or Iraqis or Afghans. That is intensely disturbing because the analogy is wholly discrepant and intensely unjust.