I think that's oversimplifying it. These national or global decisions are a chain of events.
Here's how the Iraq war could have been prevented:
* VP doesn't push for it
* President (the Commander in Chief) doesn't give the orders to attack
* Powell never gives the UN speech and resigns in protest
* Senate doesn't vote to authorize war
* Intelligence agencies push back on WMD accusations
* Military officials push back on the strategic value of occupying Iraq and push for alternative measures
* UK opposes the US war effort
* Saddam allows UN inspectors back in with unrestricted access
* If enough of the US was anti-war (it wasn't), threaten impeachment
* etc.
Sure, leader's drive initiatives, but there's still a chain of conditions and any break in the chain can cause the event to stop or change course (at least temporarily).
I think it's important to remember that with a separation of powers, we aren't powerless to stop our leaders. These things only happen because we lack the will (or the desire) to stop it.