The word »peace« is used both by the naive who confuse absence of direct violence with peace and do not understand that the work to make and build peace is now just about to start, and by the less naive who know this and do not want that work to get started. Thus the word»peace« becomes a very effective peace-blocker Our purpose is to contribute to the worldwide effort to unblock that process toward a peace beyond cease-fire so that »after violence« does not so easily become »before violence«. Galtung How can we ever expect the young people of today to find other ways to resolve their conflicts when even our own government doesn't set a good example?
Most instances of violence is wrong, but violence in general is a necessity. Violence is a primal instinct. Without it our species would be extinct long ago. Everything works well in moderation. We should limit and control ourselves. We should go in prepared for both, non-violent and violent solutions to problems.
It is almost always never the answer. On occasion however; it is the only option.
Using violence as a first resort is wrong. I don't believe in using violence until you have stressed and used every resource to disarm them and no longer have them as a threat. Only if there are no other options and there is reason to believe if you don't, somebody will die, it is your responsibility to use all resources you have to stop them; in the most humane way possible.
Sometimes you have to resort to violence.
violence is always the answer because most of the time its the question
only for good, than it is right
Sadly, it seems that it's the only solution to most serious debates in the world we currently live.