Libya and US law

Factual Questions
1

I just read on CNN that the Supreme Court let stand a lower court’s ruling that US citizens can sue (in US court) Libya for damages from the Lockerbie plane bomb. This raised a few questions:
-What happens if Libya loses the court case? Is there any action US courts can take to compel them to pay up or do we just call them worse names?
-Th article (at http://cnn.com/US/9906/14/PM-Scotus-Libya.ap/ ) says that under the “old” law the lawsuit couldn’t go forward but under a 1996 law it could. Since the crime occurred prior to the change in law, doesn’t this violate something (Habeus Corpus maybe)?

Couldn’t this be used against the US by Mexico for example in regards to war atrocities committed in the Mexican-American war? I know its a stretch but I’m trying to figure out who draws the line and where.

2

The treaty at the end of a war (in the case of Mexico, the treaty of Hidalgo Guadalupe) usually reconciles any liability incurred during hostilities. The liabilities of the victors are usually erased.

We have no such treaties with Libya, and I believe the 1996 law makes it feasible for the winner of a lawsuit against that country to sieze Libyan Government assets located in the USA.