Mike, I have not read nor heard of the book. I don't know how the author wants to define "force" in context with war. Is it an energy, strength, or power; the use of such power; intellectual vigor or influence? It seems to me that the only way war as a force gives us meaning is in how we wage it, or perceive ourselves as we wage it.
So in that way, certainly golf to me is way beyond an addictive game and is a force that gives us a measure of meaning. Perhaps, poker, yatzee, chess, or tittliwinks are addictive games that aren't really forces. Golf is a sport in my mind but goes further as a pursuit that can become a strong influence in how we conduct ourselves and plan our lifestyles or even shape our character. It also has its own energy that demands mental endeavor and some element of physicality and coordination, slightly off from pure strength or raw power. Yet, it can be an intellectually vigorous pursuit when approached with competitive intentions or a solitary strategical pursuit of challenging presentations of holes to be played as a game. It is an addictive game, but so much more that it has to be thought of as a force.
Golf falls short in impact or meaning as a force of ideology clashes or agression for economic or social domination of one power interest over another that is fought out as war. I'm glad to say that golf as a lesser force and gives us real positive meaning, rather than the negative definition that war most often leaves on all sides in the end as an historical event. War leaves uncertain meaning as to its worth in the long run of history.
Come to think of it, war and golf have become addictive in their own ways. It is just that war has been around for such a longer period of time that there is little doubt it has really caught on with us humanoids. I hope that as a force war don't outlast golf.
