You've concluded that the formula for WAR takes subjective views???
I will strive to keep this civil, although you are making it difficult.
One more time: I have seen no evidence--none, zilch, nada--that WAR measures anything. I haven't even seen an attempt by the proponants of war (visit Fangraphs! Please!) to validate their theory. It is a mathematical formula that generates a number. That's all you, or anyone else as far as I've seen, can claim with certainty. It may be a perfect measure of how many wins Joe Mauer is responsible for over a mythical "replacement player," but then again, it may be complete garbage. The point is, how would you, or WAR's proponants, know that?
Furthermore, a reasonable person looking into WAR would have to at least question the following:
1. The formula itself is pretty questionable. For example, position player WAR uses three disparate measures (wRAA, UZR, UBR), and then mashes them together into a single number. Even if we accept the validity of those three numbers, they measure separate things using separate formulas. Meshing them together is like adding body temperature, blood pressure, and age and saying you're a 289/120. It makes no sense. And that's even IF we accept the validity of the three numbers themselves, which is questionable at best. Even the inventor of UZR, for example, says UZR is unreliable over a sample size of a single season. Yet that number is used in calculating WAR.
2. The number from the formula above is then "position adjusted." WAR would tell you if Brett Gardner played CF for the Yankees, while Granderson moved to left, their WAR would be different. Same players. Same team. Same spot in the batting order. Same offensive numbers. Same mythical "replacement players." Yet by swapping positions, both of their WAR changes. WAR would tell you if Joe Mauer plays 1b, he's worth 25 less runs than if he plays C. Ignoring the questionable logic of this premise itself...where did they come up with these numbers? I'll tell you...they pretty much took the "defensive spectrum," and assigned random numbers to it. That's pretty much the story. I understand it's easier to find a 1B that puts up a .300/.400/.500 line that to find a SS that puts up identical numbers, but that doesn't mean those numbers generate more team runs simply because the player moves across the diamond.
I could go on. You are of course free to believe what you wish. If you think WAR is an accurate measure of anything, good for you. I am skeptical at best, and it's not because I haven't done the research to form my own opinion. Frankly, I'm surprised anyone who puts some thought and effort into looking into WAR pays it much attention. I suspect within a few years, few people will.