The relationship between core values and political opinions has been well documented but its implications for citizens' awareness of the reasons that ground competing opinions are less well understood. This study examines the effect of value priorities on rating different rationales for a government decision to end a war. The relationship is tested among Israelis in the days following the aftermath of the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon. Consistent with previous research, values, such as universalism, predicted dovish or hawkish positions on the ceasefire. In addition, however, different value priorities correlated, as expected, with their respective rationales for an opinion on the ceasefire. Moreover, both supporters and opponents evaluated valid (versus invalid) reasons as more important, regardless of their personal position. Overall findings suggest that, even in conflict, reasoned considerations resonate with the opinions of ordinary citizens.