Re: Violence and Aikido
I don't believe Hitler was a bully that was crying out to have someone stop him.
All good diplomacy has been backed by a strong infrastructure to include military power or the will of the people. You could call this the life giving sword. Walk softly and carry a big stick comes to mind. Name one country that did not use the will of the people to back up diplomacy. India under Ghandi's leadership did so without a strong military, however, it was the will of the people and the ultimate threat that. However you could argue that this technique worked given that there were unique conditions in place polictically with Britain that enabled this to work. It didn't go so well for Tibet and I have heard the Dali Lama relent his position and decision knowing what he knows today about the suffering his people have incurred.
It boils down to the "lesser evil" in all cases unfortunately. So, IMO, it is always about compromise mostly. Again, what worked for India did not work for Tibet based on the differences in the Diplomatic and Political conditions. Idealism is fine, but at what cost?
"The history of peacemaking far outstrips the history of wars by number and victory. Those who do not see this do not see what Ueshiba was saying either in my opinion. But then again how can many understand such enlightened views when they are not. "
Please explain this further and quantify it, because I really do not understand it. I see it the other way around. the Majority of peacemaking situations have followed periods of war and the war certainly influenced and dictated the terms of peace and reconciliation.