PNN – A review of 250 years of American history reveals that war and military intervention have become a constant component of Washington’s grand strategy, rather than merely an episodic tool of its foreign policy.
According to the report of Pakistan News Network; as it approaches its 250th anniversary, the United States continues to view itself as the world’s foremost military power—a nation that maintains over 800 military bases across the globe, commands the world’s largest military budget, and projects its military presence from East Asia to West Asia, Europe, Africa, and Latin America. Yet, what stands out most when examining American history is not merely its military might, but the persistent use of war as a primary instrument of its foreign policy.
Reports published in media outlets worldwide; coinciding with the 250th anniversary of American independence, present a different picture of the country’s history. According to these reports, the United States has carried out nearly 400 military interventions across the globe since 1776. The authors also estimate that the wars following the 9/11 attacks alone have cost the U.S. economy over $6.4 trillion, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of displaced people.
These statistics demonstrate that, contrary to the image American politicians project of their country as a champion of peace, freedom, and democracy, a significant portion of the nation’s history is intertwined with military campaigns, regime changes, territorial occupations, and direct or indirect military interventions. A review of this record raises the question: has war served merely as a tool for the United States to counter threats, or has it become an integral part of the country’s power structure and its strategy for maintaining hegemony?
From Territorial Expansion to the Formation of a Military Empire
The roots of many U.S. military interventions can be traced back to the nation’s formative decades. In the nineteenth century, American politicians—drawing upon the doctrine of “Manifest Destiny”—framed the expansion of U.S. territory as a historic, and even divine, mission; a mindset that paved the way for the seizure of Native American lands and the extension of American borders.
One of the most significant outcomes of this approach was the Mexican-American War (1846–1848). This conflict resulted in the occupation of vast swathes of Mexican territory—including California, New Mexico, and other regions that now constitute a major part of the United States’ geography. More than 78,000 American troops participated in the war, and 1,733 lost their lives; yet, Washington’s primary gain was the unprecedented expansion of its territory.
Decades later, following the defeat of Spain in 1898, the United States took control of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, and solidified its influence over Cuba. It subsequently consolidated its dominion over the Philippines by suppressing the country’s independence movement—a conflict in which more than 20,000 Filipino fighters were killed.
These developments indicate that, even before the onset of the Cold War, the United States had already embarked on the path toward becoming an imperial power. During this period, the objective was no longer merely the acquisition of territory; instead, controlling trade routes, strategic ports, shipping lanes, and new markets became a priority for Washington’s foreign policy—a process later solidified by the establishment of an extensive global network of military bases. Consequently, military power gradually emerged as the primary instrument for safeguarding American economic and geopolitical interests.
From the Cold War to the Alleged War on Terror: Shifting Narratives, Persistent Intervention
Following World War II, the United States positioned itself as the leader of the Western bloc, and “countering communism” became the primary justification for its military interventions. The Korean War served as the first major test of this strategy. Nearly 1.789 million American troops participated in the conflict, and over 33,000 lost their lives; yet, the ultimate outcome was not a decisive victory, but rather the division of the Korean Peninsula and the establishment of an armistice.
The Vietnam War also became one of the costliest and most disastrous military experiences for the United States. More than 3.4 million American troops served in the conflict, and over 47,000 lost their lives. Despite possessing overwhelming military and technological superiority, Washington failed to achieve its political objectives and was ultimately compelled to withdraw from Vietnam. Many researchers view this war as a clear example of the gap between military superiority and political success.
With the end of the Cold War, it was expected that the scale of U.S. military interventions would diminish; however, the trend of interventionism did not cease—instead, it continued under guises such as “humanitarian intervention,” “maintaining global order,” and subsequently, the “War on Terror.” The attacks of September 11, 2001, marked a turning point in this trajectory, enabling Washington to expand the scope of its military operations from Afghanistan and Iraq to Yemen, Syria, Pakistan, and other regions.
The post-9/11 wars alone have cost more than $6.4 trillion—a figure that includes the costs of military operations, veterans’ healthcare, and interest on war-related debt. These wars left hundreds of thousands dead and millions displaced, yet in many instances, they failed to achieve America’s stated objectives.
Afghanistan serves as a prime example of this situation: a war that dragged on for two decades and—despite immense costs—ultimately ended with the withdrawal of U.S. forces and the Taliban’s return to power. Similarly, the military intervention in Iraq was launched based on claims regarding weapons of mass destruction—claims that later proved to be unfounded. According to reports, the Iraq War cost the United States over a trillion dollars and claimed the lives of 4,491 American service members, while its aftermath led to the spread of instability across West Asia and the rise of extremist groups.
War: An Enduring Instrument of Power or a Sign of Declining Power?
The recent military aggression against Iran can also be viewed as a continuation of this historical trend. According to Western media reports, this war has claimed many lives, and its direct and indirect costs are projected to exceed $132 billion by mid-2026. Like some of America’s previous wars, this conflict failed to achieve Washington’s stated objectives; instead, its consequences manifested in heightened regional tensions, disruptions to energy security, and strain on the global economy.
A review of this record reveals that, although the official justifications for U.S. foreign policy have shifted repeatedly over the past two centuries—ranging from “spreading civilization” and “Manifest Destiny” to “containing communism,” “combating terrorism,” and “maintaining the international order”—a persistent reliance on military power as the primary instrument for advancing geopolitical objectives has remained a constant feature of this policy.
From the perspective of many analysts, the persistence of this pattern suggests that war in U.S. foreign policy is not merely a reaction to crises but is, rather, part of the mechanism for maintaining the nation’s global supremacy. However, rising financial costs, the erosion of military capabilities, mounting public debt, declining international trust, and the failure to achieve many political objectives have raised a question more pressing than ever: can a continued reliance on hard power serve as a substitute for diplomacy and international cooperation, or has it itself become a factor undermining the global standing of the United States?
The record of the past 250 years shows that while war has at times helped expand U.S. influence, it has simultaneously imposed heavy human, economic, and political costs on the populations of the countries involved—and even on the United States itself; this reality remains a key topic of debate in assessments of Washington’s role in the international system.