None of those things could be decided peaceably?

It's pathetic to escalate a situation to violence. Toddlers do that, adults should be able to communicate to a resolution.

Violence can be necessary... but I don't even know what kind of violence we're talking.

Malcolm X once said that to defend yourself isn't even violence, it's just common sense.

The only time I see the need for violence is when someone initiates violence towards you (or you know that they will be doing it, like someone who breaks into your house or shit like that).

The line gets blurred when we're talking preemptive strikes. When is it right to strike first? Surely we can't hurt or kill innocent people, but surely we can't allow harm or death to happen to ourselves.

To me, the battle between violence and peace is just a result of the natural world we live in. There is never, really, going to be peace; and we're never, really, going to know when violence is used properly (because often times, the preemptive strike is just so satisfying; no one wants to die or get hurt, so they will react violently at times when maybe... it wasn't necessary).

But to say that violence is a GREAT thing is kind of the same as saying that pacifism is a great thing. We're not considering real world examples and are making assumptions about this Universe that we live in. Instead of being a hippie or a war monger, merely access the situation and know what you have to do. Avoid violence if you can, but don't risk your life and the lives of other innocents just because you live by some "code".