I follow perfectly. If the state commits things other people call war crimes (such as blowing up innocent little Afghani kids), it isn't a crime. So your answe

I follow perfectly. If the state commits things other people call war crimes (such as blowing up innocent little Afghani kids), it isn't a crime. So your answer is that reducing the financial tools available to the state for harming innocents does not help reduce war crimes. You've simply defined crime in a way that avoids having to answer the question directly. So lets rephrase the question: Does restriction of financial tools that are used to abet the harming of innocent victims (which virtually everyone else but you refers to as a crime) help reduce the harming of those victims or not?