Does peace mean non-violence?

Just what started me on this topic, I do not remember, but I started to think about the unrealistic

expectations that we have of “peace” today. The phrase “non-violence” is often bandied about, many people assume that when we have achieved "non-violence" then we have found peace.

Here are some examples to illustrate what I mean:
- In South Africa it is taboo to discipline a child physically, especially in the public school system where corporal punishment is now illegal. Many first-world nations label all physical discipline as “child abuse”.

- It is becoming distasteful to call yourself an omnivore in polite company these days (distasteful for the herbivores that is :-) because, as the reasoning goes, an innocent animal had to be brutalised in order for me to that eat meat.

- When police shoot or beat criminals, somebody always screams “police brutality!”

- Whenever a government decides to go to war (for any and every reason) there will always be some “human-rights watchdog” accusing them of war-mongering.

My question is simple– is violence always wrong? Is peace merely the absence of violence? I believe in justice AND mercy. Without one you cannot have the other. Sometimes we have to fight for peace, and sometimes this will involve violence (I am speaking of "we" in terms of countries not individuals, I am not suggesting that individuals should take up arms to further their own causes!)

I did a speech in our school assembly recently that may have ruffled a few feathers. My speech was entitled “When is it right to fight?” I felt it was important that instead of always telling boys “Don’t fight. Don’t fight!” we should tell them WHEN to fight and HOW. So I told them that real men only fight to defend those that cannot defend themselves, and that this will only seldom need violence (for example-to fend off a criminal). I told them that it is only weak, selfish men that will fight to defend their pride or to take what belongs to others.

I believe that God feels the same way. In the history of God’s dealings with mankind it is clear that God thinks of violence as an unfortunate but necessary part of life. God would use one nation to discipline another nation's wickedness through military conquest. God has and God does kill people who do evil. God also expects government to use violence when they enforce justice. “For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” Rom 13:4. God gave animals to us for food. In order to eat them we will need to use violence J This is unfortunate but very necessary. And yes, God believes in beating children for their sins as well – “Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.” Prov 13:24

I think its time for us to bury the idealistic notion that peaceful people never use violence to defend what is good. A peaceful person is not defined by their hatred of violence but rather by what they are fighting for and how they are fighting for it. Sometimes the most unloving thing governments can do is to sit back and do nothing and let evil men get away with murder. Sometimes the “military solution” is the only solution. Toothless justice is not the same as mercy.