>>280566841
Peace literally can only be attained through violence. The attribution of the threat of violence is an invisible display, but yet a still-understood display of the immeasurable threat that lies in wait for those who seek to attribute their own violence which lays under the umbrella of a greater force's protection. You do not need to destroy every civilization around you in order to attain peace with them, but you do need to exist as an entity that represents either a violent reprisal to the notion of an invasion, or that of a potential violent invader in the event of terms not being considered acceptable. Through violence you can also crush those who cannot be reasoned with, will not be reasoned with, or are themselves anathema to the intent behind your future. Even if you wish to make a world totally at peace, as long as there is a sharp object and someone willing to fasten it to a stick and thrust it into someone else, you will always exist in a world where violence can and will be around every corner, and the only true answer to these unseen threats of violence is your own insurmountable similarly-unseen threat of violence.
Ironically nuclear warfare has shown the world that there is an acceptable upper-limit to the violence we are allotted to project as sovereign nations, as the nuclear threat represents a violent retribution that would destroy all of humanity. Thus we are allowed to engage in indirect proxy wars and shows and displays of force through distribution of arms and smaller states, but we cannot cross the red line or we will be forced to act on that cataclysmic threat of violence levied against one another.
