In a way I kinda understand what he means... As the saying goes, "The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference". If you really love (or hate) something with a passion, you will more than likely do something about it; whether or not this involves aggression of course depends on the philosophy of the individual/group. Being indifferent and not knowing/caring about what/who to stand up for can be dangerous as well, because it means that you're more likely to maintain the status quo... which can be just as (or perhaps more) destructive than war itself.

John Stuart Mill sounds like a miserable person. 1. He says war is ugly. 2. He glorifies the very state of mind that foments wars. He's rather confused.

I disagree.

According to Wikipedia, the most memorable point made by Mill in his work, and his basis for liberty, is that "over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign". Mill is compelled to make this assertion in opposition to what he calls the "tyranny of the majority", wherein through control of etiquette and morality, society is an unelected power that can do horrific things. Mill's work could be considered a reaction to this social control by the majority and his advocacy of individual decision-making over the self. The famous Harm Principle, or the principle of liberty, is also articulated in this work: people can do anything they like as long as it does not harm others. All branches of liberalism—as well as other political ideologies—consider this to be one of their core principles. However, they often disagree on what exactly constitutes harm.

The Baltic States fought for their independence throughout most of their history.If they hadn't I would not have been able to visit Lithuania, my parent's land of birth after the overthrow of communisn there in 1991.