Consider the following: All attackers see themselves as defenders.

Everyone is defending something – their way of life, their organization, their safety, their resources. While one group may label another group as a provocateur, as an attacker, the attacker will not see themselves that way. They will see themselves as pushed against a wall, attacking out of defense.

Many organizations (nations, for example) will claim that they only use force for defense. Yet that is all there ever is – defense, and some other group will view their actions as offensive. The only reason people resort to force is out of a need for survival – it is all defense. Even those groups seeking to build empires, who attack to absorb, do so out of needs for increasing resources – survival of their current form.

Any defensive weapon can be used offensively. If you have an excellent shield, for example, which can deflect all manner of bullets and bombs, it enables you to act with impunity. You can act unilaterally, stepping on others' toes, safe in the knowledge that they cannot attack you in response (or as they would put it, they cannot defend themselves against you).

This is not to say that one never has good cause to attack. You may attack as a means of preventing further attacks, for example, against an opponent who refuses to honor your sovereignty. This should be done with deep honesty, however, and with the understanding that your opponent views their actions as defensive and yours as offensive. Otherwise, violence becomes the default language. This is increasingly the case. One may imagine that people are only using violence as a last resort, but increasingly violence is becoming the language of choice. Evidence of a primitive culture and people.

Nations behaving like children - they still have not learned to settle their differences without violence.