How do all the civil systems get destabilized.
What gets lost in the its enviroment.
The usual door for all the various states of mind that are inherent in war is the desire to be able to sanely address those causing all the disruption and stop them from doing more. What often gets lost so quickly in the addressing, communication endeavor ideally, is the communication's quality gets to the point of confusion itself. What this most physically impacts is the justicial process, as best as we are able to execute it, as it relates to all the parties that get impacted by the states generated, in that uncivil conversation. This, of course, only adds more legs to all the arguments of impropriety that are usually behind the matter.
It would be a great help to civilization to endeavor to resolve all matters possible, as best as possible. If nothing else, the impacts absorbed by various parties should be noted and respected as a sacrifice for civilization sake. We are not God, yet we should endeavor to respect the full power of all the laws of reality upon us, including the laws of human nature. The human mind so readily extrapolated even to touching God's purer ideals, so far beyond our ability to execute.
For those who might ponder, the Vietnam war may have had a far different course, and present impact, if we had had persons allowed to willingly to risk staying with the villagers to teach and guide them about normal civil conflict resolution processes (perhaps Peace Corp members trained for the job). If they were taken prisoner by the 'Viet Cong' their job would only continue as, they were allowed, to show how resolutions should be endeavored. And inherently, they would not be taking sides and couldn't be truly called an enemy by either side. Their battle is only on the grounds of principles readily grasped by all humans. The North's leader often quoted our founding fathers. No doubt more discussion was probably needed. (Yet without a forum for it, how can it occur.) That war was really a super power feed extension of tribal warfare that had been going on for over 500 years that the French colonialist got themselves in the middle of., as I understand it. We may well have been elected out of the country in two years, as the agreement was for a vote by then. But the poor people would have been much better educated about our system of governance, plurality and conflict resolution. Likely to the point of seriously compromising the Communists endeavor much more than one might imaging off hand. And as we have well noted, in the end such people can be about as effectively controlled as one one trying to manage a school of fish with your hands, when they figure they have the upper hand, in principle. Fear may curb them, but in the end it is only a temporary solution. Valid information about, and harmony with, long term realities, ie. education and a valid culture, is the only healthy solution.
In all the variety of human conditons and cultures there seems to me to be a common path to its developement. Foundationally, there is the biological level which, if it is healthy, engenders a cultivation process to enhance its survival. If the cultural endeavor is healthy, it engenders an more thorough analysis of its enviroment, as far as it can, and does not shirk a self checking process, even upon its present cultivation endeavors. In many fundamental ways, its is only a repeating process that biology started by developing the brain for survivals sake that keeps getting more virtual in its analysis and interaction. Emotions are very primative resource management endeavors that still have value, yet often get over applied and sometimes mis-applied, or even abused by others. If we can determine the reason that a response exists, we are better able to determine how valid it is at that moment. In doing so a creature has just added a new layer of cultivation into their life. Do animals have feelings? Well, of course. Higher level of management can be very lacking, and perhaps we, as a enviroment, are in need of that limitation where they belong in its system, lest we be in want for even daily needs. They do often sacrifice for us in many ways. Yet seem quite content on the whole being what they are.
When culture's conflict resolution processes brake down, intentionally or otherwise, it is easy for errant formulas to lock onto what system remains, often to the advantage of those that have the influence to generate the state. Though even well meaning endeavors that fail to fit the fullness of reality can have similar results. A valid culture is just as much a living entity as the physical, as is the intellectual and spiritual endeavoring that grows from it and verifies and refines it.
Some say there is spiritual warfare going on all the time. It may well be a valid point. A least when it is kept to a high level of integrity it must continually address potential wasting of its more foundational resources in its struggles.
I hear that there is talk of restarting a draft. Personally, I cannot seeing it being a proper legal statement before Congress has actually declared war, which I guess they have to the point of removing Sadam. "Allowing the President to use force if necessary". Nor does it seem proper to force an individual to go overseas, and particularly, actively start aggresion if they have any qualms about the principles behind the conflict. I know I do, this country has been a poor example of how one should endeavor as much as possible toward conflict resolution processes. This leaves little head room for those influenced by various arguments to fight what it going on. War loves confusion and propagates all the better in it. And as I don't think their tendency to fight stems from a biological proclivity, such propagations are not stopped by the killing (though it may change the form it gets expressed some). To really address the problem one needs to address the fundamental logic that generates it.
To me, it would make a lot of sense to have the people also vote on whether we should stay there, and in what relationship. Whether they want the U.N. involved an in what capacity. If necessary, perhaps a unique method of voting should be tried. One where doctors also examine the people for health concerns while one of the family vote behind a screen, and are otherwise supervised by representatives from the parties. After all, doctors are not suppose to reveal heath matters either. For the sake of safety, the site might need an soldier to examine it first to keep bombs or the likes from being used. But such forays are being done already. To insure the integrity even more for posterities sake. They could put a finger print, hair or blood sample on the signature stub for identification assurances. (As I understand it, cancer researchers have now developed ways to test for a trait in DNA in a matter of seconds. So detailed varifications may not be far down the road.) In any case, posterity will be able to determine quite well how valid the endeavor was.
Ultimately, it is their decision as to what will happen. And without minority rights, such as by a Bill of Rights (which all the leaders should be working on even now) it is sure to fail. You may have already noted how I see it should be applied in an administration.
As a point of focus for all to relate from, it might be wise to consider how things would be done it all the older children where included as observers in the resolution processes between the various parties trying to generate a valid solution that all can understand and agree to. Ultimately, that is what happens to a leaders efforts anyway, though often without the thorough input by the parties trying to engender its health.
As for the world, it might be wise to have a UN standard, or the likes, conflict resolution course, required.