Sorry, but people who are skeptical of state justifications for militarism are by definition less of a threat to peace than those who support imperialist policies.
I think one of us is misunderstanding the other's position.
I don't understand the equivalence. People who are opposed to violence are less harmful than people who are not, regardless of how "crazy" you consider their beliefs.
If one is opposed to violence but still depending on a livelihood from an organization that depends on violence to realize its goals - be it a gang, a government or a military - then one might not be as opposed to violence as is thought.