Is evil to be let off the hook forever or not ?

What would eventually be 'one' way to counter the continuous
severe 'human rights' violations of the weak and vulnerable
(women/children)in parts of the world ?
After decades of stalemate or deterioration of government in Africa and other parts of the third world, causing wars, exploitation, poverty, corruption and serious lack of development


Just a mind teaser :
breaking down the 'diplomatic rationale' tabus, or, in other words,
divesting the wholy cow of 'integrity of state borders' and
'post-colonial sovereignty' and toughen up for once in favour of the vulnerable victims of male terror states.

Why not design a global scenario allowing for 'surgical military intervention' (fast in, fast out)in the world conditions we are confronted with.

What is wrong from a victim's point of view or even a humanity perspective to ruthlessly remove/kill in one or several concerted efforts the upper layers of (male)'evil scum' holding on to power in horrifying 'failed states' well known to all of us for their 'devouring' of their own populations.
States that are open ulcers, given the extreme degree of suffering by their populations.

The turmoil that could be triggered by this surgical intervention can hardly be worse than what history, the present and the future stalemate has to show for in these states in terms of large scale suffering...
In other words:
Why is a fractuous restart with possible short term anarchy in a power vacuum worse than the ongoing 'killing fields' stalemate in these 'black holes' of human society.

That means finally breaking the stranglehold of the Mugabe-clan in Zimbabwe ,the insane Kim Yong Ill, the vicious warlords in Black-Africa and Afghanistan, the Birmese generals-clan, the 'Turkmenbasha' regime in Central Asia.
Consequential outside monitoring or interference for rebuilding these societies should not be an obligation nor impediment to the drastic military intervention urgently needed.

There is clearly a restrictive list of cases where there is no measure of doubt what should be done in the face of human suffering.

Would this not be a much nobler purpose for the US army, the NATO and UN forces, if covered by a secret mandate from the 'developed part' of UN (leaving out the diplomat crooks of the targeted countries), instead of the practice of wasting valuable soldier lives in alienated attritious circumstances of toothless peacekeeping with no real outcome.

Why are we such 'weasels' in allowing 'piecemeal' genocide to continue in all corners of the world having the power for immediate strike against the culprits.
The world is not a fairy tale, we would in the end have been forced to try to ruthlessly kill the 'nazi top creed' if World War II had not ended the way it did...
Would we have bothered about possible anarchy in the aftermath of that decision?