When the conflict in its prime (or even in its first stage) here comes the classic moves from both sides’ alliances: Double standards, hypocrisy, threats, calling for peace while hiding own interest in arms industry. As they say, no one wants a war, if only you are not a politician or working in the arms industry. 

Taking away pinky-lense glasses, while trying to keep the world in peace, your neighbour may want to see that peace in a different way. So therefore, armed conflicts are inevitable… historically proved. 

In tit-for-tat strikes, calling each other as a blatant aggressor, the talk talk and talk,..negotiate is the key here. But that round table process will come to place only in matter of time, which is certain period when the both sides of a conflict (two or more sides) suddenly see…

first, the loss of financial support; money stop floating to the military forces;

second, the world’s fatigue to hear about this conflict; people get tired listening the same story over and over;

third, industrial damage from the War.

To sum up in more diplomatic way — both sides of the conflict will come to the round table when the conflict will no longer be beneficial for them [both sides]to continue. Those benefits would include concerns over territorial borders, country’s financial/economical situation, and last but not lea…um nah, it is last – human lives…”Rescuing human lives” unfortunately does not come to the first bit in the document of treaty.

Overall, the long -lasting peace is only possible — seems like —  at some place that never shares the boarders with another nation, the place that has no sufficient resources to mine,… tip up – no industrial alliances, no ambitions to expand, running an average trade,… well, basically I don’t know such place yet.