Since its establishment and up until at least 2022, the United States has conducted almost 400 military interventions across the globe. It is conceivable that the origins of this conduct may extend beyond the ideology or character of any specific president.
Donald Trump’s recent attacks on Iranian nuclear sites have once again ignited a familiar and deeply divided discussion: is the United States inherently inclined towards warfare?
The operation, described as the largest deployment of B-2 stealth bombers in history and involving over 125 aircraft along with submarine-launched missiles, occurred despite Trump’s consistent assurances to keep America out of foreign conflicts. Critics argue that this action exemplifies a persistent trend in US foreign policy—where promises of restraint are frequently overshadowed by the application of military force.
Conversely, supporters of the strikes contend that Trump was compelled to act due to the international responsibilities and security commitments associated with being a global superpower.
An empire founded on interventions
From its founding until at least 2022, the United States has executed nearly 400 military interventions globally—a figure that has significantly increased in recent decades. A report from the Congressional Research Service indicates that the US undertook 469 interventions between 1798 and 2022, with over 250 of these occurring after the conclusion of the Cold War in 1991. These interventions have affected nearly every region of the globe, from Latin America to West Asia, and from Africa to the South Pacific.
Rather than diminishing following the Cold War, military actions have only escalated. The period following 9/11 is now viewed as one of the most militarily assertive times in US history, marked not only by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq but also by ongoing drone strikes, special operations, and cyber offensives in nations such as Yemen, Somalia, and Libya.
Instead of indicating a withdrawal, America’s global military stance seems more entrenched than ever.
The framework that drives warfare
It is conceivable that the origins of this behavior extend beyond the ideology or character of any specific president. The United States maintains over 750 military installations across 80 nations and is bound by treaties to defend more than 50 countries, including through alliances such as NATO, ANZUS, and bilateral agreements with nations like Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines.
This extensive network of commitments and strategic interests engenders what some analysts refer to as a structural inclination towards intervention. Consequently, the US is perpetually at risk of being drawn into conflicts on terms set by others.
Even Trump, whose “America First” campaign vowed to terminate “endless wars,” intensified drone strikes during his initial term, eliminated Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, and redeployed troops to West Asia during crises.
Addiction or duty?
For critics, this behavior is not merely coincidental but rather a pathology: a form of compulsive warmongering masquerading as leadership. They point to the continuous series of US military operations from Korea and Vietnam to Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and now, once more, Iran.
Conversely, others contend that US military strength is the foundation of global security. As threats proliferate from both state and non-state entities, and as alliances like NATO agree to augment defense expenditures to 5 percent of GDP, they argue that America’s foreign engagements are more about deterrence than aggression.
Regardless, the question persists: Can the United States ever escape its cycle of warfare, or is the machinery of global empire too deeply entrenched to halt?
As evidenced by Trump’s recent actions, the trend is likely to continue — irrespective of who occupies the White House.
With contributions from agencies
