Thank you for your question. Not all dialogue is friendly. Some dialogue can be appropriately stern and demanding. When Chamberlain went to Munich in 1938 to talk with Hitler, he tried to be friendly and appease Hitler. Did not work because it was the wrong type of dialogue. Recently, Putin declared he would no longer agree to the grain export deal. Erdogan and Zelenskyy replied saying that fine, we will go ahead anyway, then backed it up with actions. Putin backed down. The dialogue was reasonable — it wasn’t emotional or feigned, but it was appropriately stern and demanding and was confirmed with tangible consistent actions. We will never know whether Hitler would have backed down from trying to annex parts of Czechoslovakia if he had been met with appropriately stern and demanding dialogue. I suspect, though, that when we accept that there is a large middle ground between being all nicey-nicey and reactionary violence, that we can much better deal with threats from hotheads and thugs. Not every thug can be reasoned with even with strong stern reasoning, but it is worth a try, because not every bad person is a monster. https://medium.com/p/understand-that-nazis-were-not-monsters-ea7e3f36f2ea