I think the basic misunderstanding here is that in a conflict one is trying to impose their will from the start. The question is how they go about it. I sincerely believe that you always start from a point of gentle persuasion and guidance. But sometimes that's not good enough. And if the situation is such that harm may come to you or someone else, well, maybe you need to do enough to prevent that harm. And that can include very serious things assuming you're capable of doing them. And I worry that focusing too much on either extreme (only warm fuzzies vs. kill them all and let god sort out the rest) blinds one to the options.
All in all there are a number of concepts, precepts, approaches that cross mingle in all of these threads these days........
Anyways...trying to keep on task here. Years back several of us were down near UCI after class on campus and it was decided to stop by a local campus pub for a beer. As we walked into the place, I was like third in the group, I felt a really heavy dark intent coming from a guy sitting at the bar as I started to pass. My immediate thought was and it was very clear that he was going to ambush me as I passed......I looked him in the eye and said something like "hey how is it going?" His intent disappeared and I passed without issue. My comment to him made him aware that I was aware and that an ambush was not possible...he dropped it. I am sure he got back from me my willingness and intent to address the situation at whatever level he wanted to take it. This is a situation where I may have imposed my will on him, but without a physical altercation. If he had stepped off his stool and took a step toward me I would have dropped him on the spot.
The point I have always tried to make here is that you need all the tools to be effective in whatever approach you take. You seek our and train in areas of weakness and you explore to find what is out there that can be useful. Where you can you test your skills in a training environment set up specifically to help.