While I don't believe in using force for everyday people, if we're talking about this in political terms, then sometimes force is the only way to get things done. A valid example is World War II, where people were being unjustly killed in horrific ethnic cleansing. There was likely no way to stop this atrocity without going to war. Force should be the very last resort, however.
I believe it is best to use force to make peace. This is because without this initial push, a lot of bloodshed can ensue. War, famine, exodus, and ultimately the ruination of countries can happen over what begins as small disagreements. Forcing peace, with some rules set in place allows people to grow and prosper in their own countries.
No, I do not believe it is best to use force to make peace, because that is not true peace. A person who believes that they are coerced into something will not be happy with it in the long run. It is always best to make peace by talking, but sometimes the other side doesn't want to listen.
No, it is not best to use force in an effort to make peace. In fact, such terms are contradictory and an oxymoron. If one uses violence and killing in the name of promoting peace, then it would be wise to be suspicious and distrustful of the individual making such claims.
I do not believe it is best to use force to make peace. Using force to create peace on creates a pretense of false peace because if it has to be forced, it won't have the staying power of real peace, because people will feel that they are still not being heard.