Gandalf, blood of hobbits on his hands?

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by The Might

So I now realise that this brings the discussion to a different level, debating whether Tolkien himself should be seen as guilty for promovating jingoistic and aggressive tendencies as opposed to more peaceful means.

Are you saying that the War of the Ring and the Scouring of the Shire had reasonable chances of being resolved peacefully?

[The Might]

Yes.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by The Might

Yes.

The only "peaceful" end to the War of the Ring would have seen the West surrendering to Sauron at the start.
Likewise, diplomacy was not an option when dealing with the Ruffians. The Mayor of the Shire tried going to Bag End for a "peaceful" protest and got locked in prison for it.
Elderly Lobelia Sackville-Baggins attacked one of them with an umbrella and suffered the same fate.
If you're trying to say Gandalf could have organized some sort of passive resistance or diplomatic solution, my answer is that the Hobbits would have been just as capable of bringing that about, if it could be done at all. And it couldn't.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by The Might

Yes.

Okay, I give. How, exactly could the Ring War have been resolved peacefully- dialogue and diplomacy with (ahem) Sauron? Sauron already proved, several times, that blockading doesn't work against him. He just waits a few generations for the mortals to die out and change their policies, if not subverting them outright.

I'm curious to hear your solution.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

A good deal of this debate also can reflect upon the notion of the moral/ethical obligations of a soldier who follows the orders of his superior, no matter how repugnant he may personally feel about them. That is a matter that has been debated for a very, very long time, with no certain "correct" conclusion. Gandalf is not entirely a free agent. He is, as he himself has stated, a steward -- a person who wields some degree of authority, but under the commands of, and answerable to, superior "officers." In saying that it is "no longer his job" to fight for others or solve their problems for them, he might very well be trying to say that he is not allowed to do these things, now that his primary mission is completed. Although this does not seem to be in Gandalf's character, to me, it seems to be in character with the Valar, who fear that "unnecessary" involvement and interference with the lives and free will of the Children will have disastrous ends. It may well be that Gandalf went to visit Tom Bombadil because it was one place so detached from the events happening in the rest of Middle-earth, he might find refuge there from the heartache he surely felt over being commanded to keep out of the doings in the Shire. If he were free to choose, I do think he would have wanted to go to the aid of the Hobbits, but I cannot help but feel that he did not truly have that freedom, at this point.

Well, it's another thought.