I have realized that i am many things. for one, i'm inherently violent but try to repress it. i try to be peaceful, but i can be more peaceful if i acknowledge the other half. this realization has led me to my theory of engagement, ergo how i feel that people engage their problems. i will use military terminology from here on out, so my apologies.
there are a million ways to attack an opponent, and all are viable given the situation, but i will highlight just two ways to justify my point.
how i engage my problems or opponents is that i do not want a close game. no last second shots, no sliding into home after a 2 and 3 count, none of that because that does not leave room for error. i LOVE complete and total devastation of my opponents. i engage my problems with that zeal and destroy it and then burn the village, kill the witnesses and salt the ground. that way there is no way for any problems to pop up from this as there is nothing left. that is my way.
the opposite way of this is a sort of hit and run style. a guerilla warfare sort where one runs from their problems and will only fight them when they are corner, and they will fight them just long enough to escape. in this way the problems will only mount and get stronger and fuel any other problems one has.
Personally i find that many people choose the guerilla because it is easier but it is these same people who complain about the same things.
are there other ways to engage problems? sure! but keep in mind what General George S. Patton said, "No one has ever won a war by dying for his country... You win wars by making the other guy die for his country."
good words to live by, esp. in business.