What is war, and is it really necessary?

Its an 'unfortunate state' of 'International relations'. It would seem that the 'unfortunate aspects' arise from some 'political posture', but, not necessarily so. To be sure, its a 'political posture', but not in some complete fashion. Its a very sensitive issue, because it also arises from the 'human condition', and not 'solely' from a 'political' condition. Let me clarify. Yes, the International 'political' condition are causes for war, but the real cause, is the 'individual perception' by some leader about the 'state or condition' of his/her political entity, or Nation, in its political relations with other Nations. "War" is a term used only in International relations. In most cases its an expression of Power. When conflicts between States or Individuals arise, different terms are used. For example; "fights", "arguments", "rebellion", "revolution", etc. Of course, the 'war' between the States was called a Civil War, but was it a 'War', or was it something else? Well, that's not our issue. But, the point is that the term "War" is usually reserved for some International conflict, where all the 'stops are pulled out'. It requires a total commitment. Of course, that means all the People who become necessary. But, in actuality, a 'Nation' never goes to War; its the People that go to War; the Nation has merely had a political 'disagreement', of sorts, in its relations with other Nations. That's why most People are against War, because it is they who go to War, and furthermore, the consequences reflect on the social, economic, and living conditions, of the Nation. Furthermore, the People, in general, have no say-so about the decision. The Top of government decides to go to War. I imagine that's one of the most difficult decisions that a Statesperson has to make. The reasons for going to War is a political decision. But, the problematic arises when the Top decides to go to War, and bases the decision on a 'personal', 'personality', 'egoistic', or 'petty' basis for making the decision. That's not a 'political decision'; that, arises from some 'pugnacious', 'power hungry', element of personality. Of course, there's always the 'defensive posture', where someone else 'makes gestures' of War, and the Nation, must get involved. That's understandable, but the 'offensive posture' is never necessary. A nation should never get involved in the 'inner workings' of another Nation. At this point, the argument 'bogs down'. Just how much 'human abuse' within any Nation, is tolerable, before the people, in general, i.e. the World, decide to organize their 'strength in Numbers', to defend their humanity. It 'bogs' down, because its both, a 'political decision', and a 'human decision'. There are no easy answers, but the basic consideration should be the 'human condition', not the 'political condition'. The reason for that is simple; the human condition was here before the 'politicians' decided to 'separate' into political entities and then, declare 'political war' against each other.