Well, you could say that war worked for the Romans back then (but, it was a different time with slaves as normal thing of everday-life !). Yet, war has changed its face over the time, I forgot to write that. Let's begin with the Romans, where people fought against people. And people were subdued, because most tribes were "honourful" warriors, that were ashamed if conquered (Take Vercingetorix as an example, surrendering before Caesar). Then I leave the steel-plated knights aside. The war in 16th and 17th century were fought in a wholly ridicolous way from a today's point of view. Armees marched up in nice squares, opposed each other on battle field and began shooting. It was a clean (for only soldiers took part in it), nearly mathematical way of fighting, very often used as a mean of politics. Already when the armees were marching up, you could tell who would win, for no solider would take cover, they just stood there and shot. The french revolution then changed wholly the face of war, because suddenly people were fighting it, and not politicians moving their armees around on a board. People took cover, stormed, ran. War became emotional. And the rest is history ;) (sorry, I like that phrase a lot.)
One could say that NATO is fighting the war mathematically, while the federal republic of yugoslavia is doing it emotionally, but all that nationalism and folks fighting each other appeared first 19th and 20th century.
I agree with you on war between people are always brutal. With my state about the supertechnology I meant that this is the only way of absolutely cleaning the other "race" (take Hitler and the Jews, he could not kill all of them, not even in Germany !) (It reminds me a little of the Borg, El Aurial and Guinan, resistance is _not_ futile ... pardon the off-topic). And "Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Israel" were not intended as an example for the war in Yugoslavia (just for war not working in general). That war in Yugoslavia has imho not even begun yet. NATO won't win without ground troops. However, they will never ever send in soldiers, beside the costs, they would suffer terrific casulties (today's key word is: Mines) and such a war cannot be sold to the people at home, not even with nice, shiny pictures on CNN. Furthermore, you mentioned genocide, which is imho just the attempt to stop the other race from resisting in a ... terminal way.
Unforunately, I cannot comment on the Falkland War because I have no clue what that was. Yet, the example with the Romans is disputable, as I explained above.