War is a lazy outcome in that it is a populist outcome and is very much a well-trodden path stirred up by mobilisation of fears and prejudices. How do you mobilise a group of men to set about killing another set of men?
It has been seen as the continuation of foreign policy by other means. Machiavelli's take would be as you described I imagine.
It was intentionally politically loaded but my crux is this: the word "politics", "political" is often used to make something sound unduly opinionated, facile or even inappopriate or irrelevant. I contend quite strongly that if something is "political", even within this context, that does not render it anything less worthwhile than any "non-political content." For politics, read choices or beliefs or questions. Forget chambers and parliaments and party hustings etc, so I would take that as an observation rather than a point of concern.

The consequences, if negative, for the ruling elite are bound up in the confines of personal ambition and realpolitik. In terms of bloodshed and upheavel and the breaking up of generations, they will carry very little of this.
You acknowledge the energy involved in gearing up for war which is massive. The lazyness I refer to is not the one you appear to have assumed I meant. It is rather a lazyness to refrain from exploring constructive options; the lazyness to sit back and explore a reactive foreign policy rather than a progressive one. War can be a consequence of moral inertia and lazyness.

You make the anti-war position sound facile with a particular paragraph. Might I suggest a more complex approach where you consider who benefits from wars? We were told in Britain post-1945 that the "People's War" won immense dividend for the working classes i.e welfare state etc. However these were subsequently eroded and undermined. War is a the result of a failure. It is as despicable and foolish as a bar-room brawl expect it is made to be more sophisticated as it is dressed up and paraded as a National Effort, or a Battle For Our Way Of Life That We Must Win or an Effort To Defeat The Axis Of Evil.

To sum all this up I would quote one Mr Edwin Starr. War, what is good for?.............

With regards to your comments over elitism, and your take on the inclusion of politics in wider forums such as this I would imagine the thought pattern had rather a nice rhythmn to it. Read back cold it comes over as a tad aggressive so I will not reply to this save to say your approach is somewhat simplistic, one-dimensional and crudely belligerent.

To abuse a turn of medical phraseology my approach to such forums is holistic (not sure if quite the correct term) and I will not box off politics or indeed religion. This forum should be a "safe" environment where people do not run and hide from such areas and are part of our discussions and games centred around words, their uses, their meaning and the abuse of words in all sorts of contexts.

Now I am off to listen to some pan pipes, buy a bigger pair of sandals and wistfully sing some Peter, Paul & Mary. Where did I leave those lentils?