War as a justification for peace

Childhood in ruins.

From the article:

The 23-day war in numbers

Statistics from the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme

• 1,420 Palestinians killed, 446 of them children

• 5,320 injured, 1,855 of them children

• 4,000 houses destroyed

• 16,000 houses damaged

• 94.6% of children aged six-17 heard the sound of sonic jetfighters

• 91.7% of them heard shelling by artillery

• 92% saw mutilated bodies on TV

• 80% were deprived of water or electricity

• 50.7% left home for a safer place

• 25.9% report one symptom of PTSD

• 39.3% report more than one symptom

• 9.8% report full criteria of PTSD

So I'm guessing the president of the US has a daily account of the casualties of war placed in front of him, everyday. What I don't understand is how he can still continue to justify war. He knows, probably better than most others, the numbers involved. And he still does not look for a more civilised solution to the US' problems. He hasn't even been completely frank with his own countrymen.

And I'd have appreciated him a lot more if he had declined the Nobel Prize. Be straightforward about what you are doing. Dressing up in nice clothes to accept a peace prize and attending fancy parties hosted by the Nobel Committee when the people you sent to war are dying...I honestly don't know how he sleeps at night. If you want to wage war, be open about it. Be honest. Don't try to reinterpret the situation to make it seem like you actually deserve the prize. Just say, 'No, thank you. You know, I've just sent 30,000 soldiers to the battlefield. I don't think I should be accepting this prize. I wish I could, but it's completely at odds with what my principles dictate right now.' That would have been so much more decent than what he's doing. Dude, the Nobel Prize isn't all that valuable, man. Not more valuable than the lives of all the people who are being killed to ostensibly bring about peace.

I hope he's not started believing others' delusions about his potential. Potential, in the world of politics and global affairs, is useless when it isn't converted into achievement.

From his speech:
And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. (Laughter.)

Laughter?!?! When did the Prize turn into a joke? Shouldn't that 'laughter' actually read 'mild, uncomfortable squirming'?

Oh, and?
But there has been no Third World War.

Yet.

[I know the US president is not (directly) responsible for the Gaza strikes, but it's a specific example that illustrates the cost of any war. I'm not blaming Obama for Gaza.]