I see where you’re coming from, but I disagree that the normalization argument is the only interpretation of whats going on here. Language is extremely fluid and its development often exceeds our own conscious understanding.

« A sustained campaign against something undesirable » is already a commonly accepted definition of the word war. It can grow to mean different things in different contexts just as much as any other word can. I think we need a lot more argument to prove the normalization of the word causes peoples perspective of conflict to change