Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Perpetual war

Perpetual war refers to a paradigm of indefinite military engagements lacking explicit conditions for termination, resolution, or demobilization, often perpetuated through successive interventions that maintain a wartime economy, institutional momentum, and strategic postures without conclusive victories.^[1]^[2] In the United States, this has characterized foreign policy since the end of World War II, with the country undertaking more than 200 military interventions abroad—over half of the 393 total since 1776—encompassing major conflicts like the Korean War (1950–1953), which concluded in an armistice rather than peace treaty, and Vietnam (1964–1973), alongside smaller operations in dozens of nations.^[3]^[4] These engagements have involved continuous troop deployments, averaging over 500,000 personnel abroad annually from 1950 to 2000, including persistent rotations in Korea, Europe, and post-9/11 theaters like Afghanistan and Iraq.^[5]^[4] The phenomenon is causally tied to the military-industrial complex, a term coined by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his January 17, 1961, farewell address, where he cautioned that "in the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" due to its potential to distort priorities toward perpetual preparedness over peaceful alternatives and domestic needs.^[6]^[7] Post-2001 authorizations for use of military force have extended this pattern, enabling open-ended operations against terrorism without sunset provisions, sustaining defense budgets exceeding $800 billion annually while correlating with fiscal deficits and deferred infrastructure investments.^[4]^[8] Critics, drawing on first-hand analyses of intervention outcomes, argue that such wars generate blowback through resentment in intervened regions, as documented in over 190 U.S. incursions since 1945 that yielded limited strategic gains amid high human and economic costs, including trillions in expenditures and erosion of constitutional war termination powers.^[1]^[4] Proponents counter that continuous engagements deter adversaries and secure global influence, though empirical data on deterrence efficacy remains contested, with no major power war since 1945 but persistent low-intensity conflicts.^[9] This tension underscores defining characteristics: the fusion of security imperatives with contractor profits, the normalization of executive-led warfare bypassing declarations of war (none since 1942), and the domestic trade-offs of prioritizing armaments over innovation in non-military sectors.^[6]^[4]

Definition and Conceptual Framework

Core Definition and Distinctions

Perpetual war denotes a sustained state of military conflict lacking explicit conditions for cessation, where hostilities endure without resolution or definitive victory. This condition manifests as interminable combat, often decoupled from territorial conquest or political settlement, persisting across administrations or regimes.^[10]^[11] Unlike episodic wars with identifiable endpoints—such as the Allied victory in World War II on September 2, 1945—perpetual war operates without such closure, enabling indefinite resource allocation to defense sectors.^[12] The term overlaps with "endless war" or "forever war," descriptors emphasizing structural permanence over temporary escalation.^[13] These synonyms arose prominently in analyses of 20th-century U.S. policy, as in historian Charles A. Beard's 1947 critique "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace," which argued that post-World War II commitments entrenched America in continuous global entanglement, diverging from isolationist precedents.^[14] Distinctions emerge in intent: conventional wars target finite aims like regime change, whereas perpetual variants prioritize maintenance of conflict itself, as theorized in George Orwell's 1984 (1949), where superstates wage fabricated wars to exhaust surpluses, suppress dissent, and justify surveillance.^[15] Perpetual war further contrasts with cold wars, which involve proxy tensions and deterrence without direct, unceasing engagement, or with attritional conflicts like the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648), which ended via negotiated treaty despite prolongation.^[16] In modern contexts, it is exemplified by U.S. operations post-September 11, 2001, encompassing over 20 years of combat in multiple theaters by 2021, without overarching victory parameters.^[12] This framework underscores causal mechanisms beyond mere aggression, including institutional momentum where war bureaucracies self-perpetuate absent external checks.^[17]

Philosophical and Theoretical Foundations

The philosophical foundations of perpetual war trace back to ancient thinkers who viewed conflict as an intrinsic driver of human society and order. Heraclitus, a pre-Socratic philosopher active around 500 BCE, famously asserted that "war is both father of all and king of all," positing strife (polemos) as the generative force distinguishing gods from men, free from slaves, and establishing cosmic and social hierarchies.^[18] This perspective frames war not as aberration but as foundational to existence, a theme echoed in later realist traditions that reject utopian visions of harmony. In modern political philosophy, Thomas Hobbes extended this logic to interstate relations in Leviathan (1651), describing the international arena as analogous to the pre-civilizational state of nature: a "war of every man against every man" (bellum omnium contra omnes), where sovereign states, lacking a higher authority, perpetually compete for survival and power amid mutual suspicion.^[19] Hobbes argued that without enforceable covenants, rational self-preservation compels endless preparation for conflict, rendering peace fragile and temporary; this "Hobbesian trap" underpins realist skepticism toward disarmament or perpetual alliances, as trust deficits amplify insecurities.^[20] Twentieth-century international relations theory formalized these ideas in political realism, emphasizing anarchy—the absence of overarching governance—as the structural cause of recurrent conflict. Hans Morgenthau's Politics Among Nations (1948) contended that states pursue national interest defined in terms of power, leading to inevitable clashes in a self-help system where moral absolutism yields to pragmatic balance-of-power maneuvers.^[20] Similarly, Kenneth Waltz's neorealism in Theory of International Politics (1979) attributes war's persistence to systemic pressures: bipolar or multipolar distributions incentivize arms buildups and alliances, perpetuating a security dilemma where defensive actions provoke offensive responses, ensuring conflict cycles without resolution.^[20] Offensive realists like John Mearsheimer further argue that great powers maximize relative power absent hegemony, forecasting aggressive expansionism and deterrence failures as normative rather than exceptional.^[21] Contrasting these views, Immanuel Kant's Perpetual Peace (1795) diagnosed perpetual war as the default under fragmented republics and balance-of-power diplomacy, advocating federative republicanism, international law, and economic interdependence to escape it—yet realists critique such liberal prescriptions as ahistorical, ignoring enduring power asymmetries that sustain rivalry.^[22] Carl von Clausewitz's On War (1832) complements realism by theorizing war as politics by other means, implying its prolongation when political ends remain indeterminate or subordinated to military logic, as in "absolute war" unbound by friction or culmination points.^[23] Collectively, these foundations reject pacifist idealism, grounding perpetual war in causal mechanisms of human agency, structural incentives, and empirical patterns of state behavior rather than ideological constructs.^[20]

Historical Manifestations

Ancient and Pre-Modern Examples

The Neo-Assyrian Empire (c. 911–609 BCE) exemplified perpetual warfare as a core mechanism for territorial expansion, resource extraction, and political stability, with annual military campaigns documented in royal annals as routine operations against vassals, neighbors, and distant foes. Kings such as Ashurnasirpal II (r. 883–859 BCE) and Tiglath-Pileser III (r. 745–727 BCE) orchestrated relentless sieges and deportations, employing terror tactics like mass impalements to deter rebellion, which sustained the empire's economy through tribute but ultimately contributed to overextension by the late 7th century BCE.^[24]^[25] In ancient Sparta (c. 8th–4th centuries BCE), societal structure revolved around perpetual military vigilance against the helot population, whose subjugation required ongoing suppression to prevent uprisings, as evidenced by institutions like the krypteia—a ritualized annual hunt where young Spartans killed helots to instill fear and maintain control. This system, rooted in the aftermath of the Messenian Wars (c. 8th–7th centuries BCE), prioritized collective warrior training over economic or cultural pursuits, rendering peace illusory and embedding conflict as a foundational element of the polity's survival.^[26]^[27] The Aztec Empire (c. 1428–1521 CE) institutionalized "flower wars" (xochiyaoyotl), pre-arranged ritual combats with allied or tributary city-states like Tlaxcala, designed not for decisive conquest but to secure live captives for human sacrifice to sustain cosmic order and elite status. These engagements, intensifying after famines in the 1450s CE under rulers like Moctezuma I (r. 1440–1469 CE), involved thousands of warriors in non-lethal captures using obsidian-edged weapons, perpetuating a cycle of controlled violence that reinforced religious ideology and military hierarchies without risking full-scale annihilation of opponents.^[28]^[29]^[30]

20th Century Developments

The 20th century witnessed the evolution of perpetual war through the establishment of permanent military apparatuses following the World Wars, culminating in the Cold War's framework of indefinite ideological confrontation and proxy engagements. World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945) demanded unprecedented total mobilization, with the latter alone causing 70–85 million deaths and fostering enduring military-industrial infrastructures in major powers.^[31] These conflicts deviated from historical patterns of demobilization, as nations retained large standing armies and defense budgets to deter future threats, setting the stage for continuous preparedness. The Cold War (1947–1991) epitomized perpetual war by sustaining global tension between the U.S.-led Western bloc and the Soviet Union without direct superpower clash, instead channeling rivalry into an arms race that peaked with over 70,000 nuclear warheads and proxy conflicts across Asia, Africa, and Latin America.^[32] U.S. defense spending averaged 6–10% of GDP throughout the era, funding a vast complex of procurement and alliances like NATO (formed 1949).^[33] The Truman Doctrine, articulated on March 12, 1947, pledged American support to counter communist subversion worldwide, initiating containment and enabling interventions without defined endpoints.^[34] Key manifestations included the Korean War (1950–1953), a U.S.-backed defense of South Korea against North Korean invasion supported by China and the USSR, resulting in over 2 million military and civilian deaths and concluding in an armistice rather than peace treaty, leaving the peninsula divided.^[35] The Vietnam War (1955–1975) extended this pattern, with U.S. escalation against North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces yielding 58,220 American fatalities and 1–3 million total deaths, amid domestic opposition that highlighted the costs of indefinite commitment.^[36] Other U.S. actions, such as support for anti-communist regimes in Greece (1947–1949) and interventions in Guatemala (1954) and the Dominican Republic (1965), numbered in the dozens post-1945, reflecting systemic engagement in low-intensity conflicts.^[37] President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his January 17, 1961, farewell address, warned of the military-industrial complex's potential to acquire "unwarranted influence," urging vigilance against its drive for sustained militarization that could prioritize procurement over peace.^[6] Soviet counterparts pursued analogous policies, including the 1956 Hungarian intervention and 1968 Prague Spring suppression, entrenching a bipolar order where deterrence and expansionism perpetuated hostility. This era's dynamics, critiqued by historian Charles Beard as "perpetual war for perpetual peace" in reference to pre-Cold War policies, underscored economic and strategic incentives for endless conflict.

Underlying Drivers

Geopolitical and Strategic Necessities

In the anarchic international system, states face inherent uncertainty about others' intentions, compelling them to prioritize survival through power maximization, as articulated in offensive realism. This structural imperative drives great powers to seek regional hegemony where possible, viewing relative gains in military and territorial control as essential buffers against potential aggression, thereby engendering continuous strategic competition rather than stable peace.^[38] Such dynamics necessitate perpetual vigilance and proactive measures, as passivity risks exploitation by revisionist actors, perpetuating a zero-sum environment where one state's security enhancement directly threatens others.^[39] The security dilemma further entrenches these necessities, wherein defensive armaments or alliances—intended solely for self-protection—are often misinterpreted as preparations for offense, triggering reciprocal escalations that sustain conflict readiness. For instance, during the interwar period from 1919 to 1939, Britain's naval buildup and France's Maginot Line fortifications, aimed at deterrence, fueled German rearmament under the Treaty of Versailles constraints, culminating in heightened tensions by 1938.^[40] ^[41] This spiral effect, rooted in informational asymmetries and misperceptions, renders disarmament or de-escalation risky, as states cannot credibly signal benign intent without vulnerability, thus embedding low-level conflicts or proxy engagements as ongoing strategic requirements.^[42] Balance-of-power politics reinforces perpetual war by demanding interventions to counteract emerging dominants, preserving equilibrium through alliances and preemptive actions that frequently evolve into hostilities. In classical realism, this manifests as a systemic check where multipolar configurations—evident in 18th- and 19th-century Europe with coalitions against France in 1792–1815 and Germany in 1914—necessitate fluid realignments, as unchecked hegemony invites conquest and subjugation.^[43] Empirically, the Congress of Vienna system from 1815 to 1854 maintained relative stability via periodic adjustments, yet required Austrian, Prussian, and Russian engagements in conflicts like the Crimean War (1853–1856) to avert French or Ottoman overreach, illustrating how strategic necessities prioritize preventive balancing over indefinite truce. These mechanisms, while averting total conquest, inherently prolong militarized postures and opportunistic wars to recalibrate power distributions.

Economic and Institutional Incentives

The military-industrial complex, as articulated by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his January 17, 1961, farewell address, represents a core institutional incentive for sustained conflict, wherein the intertwined interests of the armed forces, defense contractors, and government bureaucracies foster policies that prioritize ongoing military engagement over resolution. Eisenhower cautioned that this complex could acquire "unwarranted influence" in government councils, potentially distorting priorities away from peaceful alternatives toward perpetual preparedness and intervention.^[6] Empirical data underscores this dynamic: U.S. defense contractors, such as the top five firms (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman), secured over $771 billion in Pentagon contracts from 2020 to 2024, with Lockheed Martin alone receiving $313 billion, much of it tied to protracted operations like those in Afghanistan and Ukraine.^[44] Economically, defense spending generates localized benefits that incentivize prolongation of conflicts, including job creation and industrial output, though aggregate growth effects are negative. In fiscal year 2023, U.S. military expenditures totaled approximately $877 billion, supporting an estimated 3.5 million jobs directly and indirectly through multipliers in manufacturing and supply chains, with states like Virginia and California deriving 4-5% of their GDP from defense-related activities.^[45] However, econometric analyses indicate that a 1% GDP increase in military outlays correlates with a 9% reduction in long-term economic growth over two decades, as resources divert from productive civilian sectors like infrastructure and R&D.^[46] For contractors, endless wars—such as the 20-year Afghanistan conflict—yield sustained revenue streams from logistics, maintenance, and weaponry replenishment, rather than one-off victory procurements; Halliburton, for instance, earned $39.5 billion in Iraq War contracts by 2010, largely for open-ended reconstruction and supply services.^[47] Institutional mechanisms amplify these incentives through lobbying and personnel flows. The defense sector expended over $100 million annually on lobbying from 2018 to 2023, targeting Congress to embed cost-plus contracts and supplemental war funding that evade budget caps.^[48] Campaign contributions from top contractors exceeded $34.7 million in the 2022 cycle, disproportionately benefiting members of defense authorizing committees, where a $10 million donation pool has been linked to $45 billion in subsequent spending hikes.^[44]^[49] The revolving door exacerbates this: in 2021, at least 36 Pentagon officials transitioned to defense firms that then received $89 billion in contracts, while a 2022 audit identified 672 instances of top contractors employing former generals, lawmakers, and executives, facilitating insider knowledge and policy capture.^[50]^[51] Within bureaucracies, career incentives align with perpetual war, as promotions for military officers often hinge on operational tempo and budget oversight rather than decisive outcomes, while agencies like the Department of Defense exhibit budgetary inertia—resisting cuts even post-mission, as seen in the $858 billion FY2024 request amid drawdowns from prior theaters.^[52] These structures create a feedback loop where threat inflation sustains appropriations, with defense think tanks and contractors funding narratives of enduring global risks to justify indefinite engagements.^[53]

Key Theoretical Perspectives

Classical Analyses of Endless Conflict

Thucydides, the ancient Greek historian, provided one of the earliest systematic analyses of endless conflict in his History of the Peloponnesian War (circa 431–404 BCE), portraying the 27-year struggle between Athens and Sparta as structurally inevitable rather than merely accidental. He attributed the war's outbreak to the growth of Athenian power, which engendered fear in Sparta, compounded by honor and self-interest among city-states; these factors created a dynamic where rising powers inevitably clash with established ones, perpetuating cycles of rivalry absent overriding authority.^[54] Thucydides emphasized that human nature's unchanging tendencies toward ambition and insecurity ensure such conflicts recur, as evidenced by the Melian Dialogue, where Athenian envoys declared that "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must," underscoring power's primacy over justice in interstate relations.^[55] Thomas Hobbes extended this realist perspective in Leviathan (1651), conceptualizing the international realm as a state of nature among sovereigns, analogous to the pre-civil condition of individuals marked by "war of every man against every man." In this anarchic arena, states exhibit perpetual mutual suspicion—driven by competition for resources, diffidence for security, and glory for reputation—leading not to ceaseless battles but to a constant disposition toward war, where peace treaties offer only temporary truces vulnerable to defection.^[56] Hobbes argued that without a global enforcer akin to the domestic sovereign, rational self-preservation compels states to maintain arms and alliances, rendering endless potential conflict the default equilibrium; he observed that even during lulls, "force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues," reflecting causal realism in power vacuums.^[57] Niccolò Machiavelli, in The Prince (1532) and Discourses on Livy (circa 1517), analyzed continuous conflict as inherent to human ambition and fortuna's unpredictability, advising rulers that "war cannot be avoided; it can only be postponed to another's advantage," thus necessitating perpetual military readiness to exploit opportunities or avert decline. He viewed internal tumults and external wars as vital for republican vigor, drawing from Roman history where class conflicts between plebs and nobles, if channeled, prevented stagnation but risked endless strife if inequality festered unchecked.^[58] Machiavelli's empirical observation of history's cycles—where virtuous arms sustain principalities amid recurrent threats—highlights causal drivers like human variability and the need for adaptive force, rejecting idealistic repose in favor of pragmatic acceptance of conflict's recurrence.^[59]

Deterrence and Peace Through Strength

The concept of deterrence rests on the strategic principle that a credible threat of retaliation, capable of inflicting unacceptable costs on a potential aggressor, can prevent hostile actions without the need for preemptive strikes or prolonged engagements.^[60] This approach assumes rational actors weigh risks and benefits, opting against conflict when defeat or mutual destruction appears inevitable, as formalized in theories of mutually assured destruction (MAD) during the nuclear era.^[61] Empirical observation supports this in the post-1945 period, where no direct great-power wars occurred despite intense rivalries, contrasting sharply with the two world wars of the prior half-century; proponents attribute this "long peace" to the stabilizing effect of nuclear arsenals deterring escalation.^[62] Critics, often from disarmament-oriented institutions, argue the absence of proof for causation undermines claims of efficacy, yet the sustained avoidance of total war amid proxy conflicts provides circumstantial validation absent alternative explanations for the era's relative restraint.^[63] "Peace through strength," a doctrine prominently advanced by U.S. President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, operationalizes deterrence by prioritizing military modernization and overmatch to signal resolve and impose economic burdens on adversaries.^[64] Reagan articulated this in a 1983 address, stating that "peace is the condition under which mankind was meant to flourish" but requires strength to deter tyrants tempted by perceived weakness.^[65] Applied against the Soviet Union, the policy involved a 40% increase in defense spending from 1981 to 1985, deployment of Pershing II missiles in Europe, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which strained Moscow's economy—already burdened by a defense outlay equivalent to 15-20% of GDP—contributing to the USSR's collapse in 1991 without direct U.S.-Soviet combat.^[66] This outcome exemplifies how asymmetric strength can compel adversary retrenchment, averting broader conflict; historical analyses credit it with ending the Cold War on non-violent terms, as Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev later acknowledged the unsustainable arms race.^[67] In counterpoint to narratives of perpetual war as unchecked expansionism, deterrence theory posits that sustained military readiness mitigates endless conflict by raising the threshold for aggression, fostering stability through credible denial and punishment capabilities.^[68] For instance, naval superiority has historically correlated with victory in 25 of 28 major fleet engagements since 1650, underscoring how overmatch deters naval powers from risky ventures.^[69] Contemporary applications include U.S. extended deterrence commitments in Europe and Asia, where forward-deployed forces and alliance cohesion have forestalled invasions, such as Russia's restraint against NATO members post-2014 despite annexing Crimea.^[70] While academic skepticism—often rooted in institutional preferences for multilateral disarmament—questions long-term reliability, the doctrine's causal logic aligns with observed patterns: weakness invites probes, as in the 1930s appeasement era leading to World War II, whereas demonstrable strength correlates with de-escalation, as evidenced by the post-1989 European order.^[71] Thus, peace through strength reframes military posture not as a driver of perpetual war but as its antidote, prioritizing prevention over reaction.

Modern and Contemporary Examples

Post-Cold War Conflicts

The end of the Cold War in 1991, marked by the dissolution of the Soviet Union, initially promised reduced global tensions and a "peace dividend" for major powers, yet the United States initiated over 250 military interventions in the subsequent decades, many transitioning from limited operations into extended commitments.^[37] These actions, often under NATO or unilateral auspices, addressed humanitarian crises, regional aggressions, and emerging threats, but frequently lacked conclusive endings, fostering a cycle of ongoing deployments across multiple theaters.^[9] The 1991 Gulf War exemplified early post-Cold War dynamics: a U.S.-led coalition expelled Iraqi forces from Kuwait by February 28, 1991, after a 42-day campaign, yet halted short of deposing Saddam Hussein, leading to twelve years of containment measures including northern and southern no-fly zones enforced by U.S. and British aircraft until 2003.^[72] This policy, combined with UN sanctions, aimed to curb Iraqi threats but sustained low-level military engagement and regional instability, with U.S. forces conducting over 100,000 sorties in enforcement missions.^[73] Interventions in the 1990s further illustrated prolonged involvement: Operation Restore Hope in Somalia began December 1992 with 28,000 U.S. troops for humanitarian aid amid famine and clan warfare, but escalated into combat against warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid, culminating in the October 3, 1993, Battle of Mogadishu where 18 U.S. Rangers and Delta Force operators died, prompting withdrawal by March 1994—though U.S. advisory and counterterrorism operations resumed in the 2000s.^[74] In the Balkans, NATO's 1995 Implementation Force in Bosnia deployed 60,000 troops following the Dayton Accords, evolving into the Stabilization Force with U.S. contributions until 2004, while the 1999 Kosovo air campaign of 78 days led to a UN administration and ongoing KFOR peacekeeping with 4,000-5,000 NATO personnel as of 2023.^[75] The September 11, 2001, attacks catalyzed the most enduring post-Cold War engagements under the global war on terror. The U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, toppled the Taliban regime harboring al-Qaeda within weeks, but counterinsurgency and nation-building extended the mission for 20 years, ending with withdrawal on August 30, 2021, after 2,459 U.S. military fatalities and total post-9/11 war violence claiming over 940,000 lives across theaters.^[76] Similarly, the Iraq invasion on March 20, 2003, ousted Saddam Hussein by April 9, with major combat declared over on May 1, yet an insurgency prolonged occupation until U.S. withdrawal in December 2011, costing 4,431 U.S. military lives; the 2014 rise of the Islamic State prompted Operation Inherent Resolve, with U.S. forces conducting airstrikes and advising Iraqi troops, maintaining about 2,500 personnel in Iraq and Syria as of 2023.^[77]^[78] These conflicts interconnected with proxy and covert operations, such as drone strikes in Pakistan (over 400 from 2004-2018), Yemen, and Somalia, where U.S. Africa Command reported 13 acknowledged strikes in Somalia alone in 2017, expanding to small troop footprints and special operations against al-Shabaab persisting into the 2020s.^[74] The 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, authorized by UN Resolution 1973, enforced a no-fly zone and supported rebels toppling Muammar Gaddafi by October 27, 2011, but yielded civil war and militia fragmentation, with U.S. drone and advisory roles continuing amid instability. Overall, this era saw U.S. forces in combat or support roles without interruption for over two decades post-1991, as operations overlapped across regions, sustaining budgetary commitments exceeding $8 trillion for post-9/11 wars alone.^[76]^[12]

21st-Century Asymmetric Wars

The Global War on Terror, initiated after the September 11, 2001 attacks, exemplified 21st-century asymmetric warfare through U.S.-led coalitions confronting non-state actors employing guerrilla tactics, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and suicide bombings against technologically superior conventional forces.^[79] In Afghanistan, Operation Enduring Freedom began on October 7, 2001, with airstrikes and special operations targeting al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, but evolved into a protracted counterinsurgency against Taliban resurgence using hit-and-run ambushes and IEDs that inflicted asymmetric attrition on coalition troops.^[80] The conflict lasted 20 years until the U.S. withdrawal in August 2021, during which Taliban forces controlled or contested up to 50% of Afghan territory by 2018, demonstrating the difficulty of defeating decentralized insurgents embedded in local populations.^[81] In Iraq, the 2003 invasion rapidly toppled Saddam Hussein's regime, but the subsequent insurgency from 2003 to 2011 featured Sunni militants, including al-Qaeda in Iraq, utilizing urban bombings, sectarian violence, and roadside explosives to exploit the power vacuum and prolong U.S. occupation.^[82] Peak violence in 2006-2007 saw over 20,000 insurgent attacks annually, forcing a U.S. surge of 30,000 additional troops, yet instability persisted, enabling the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS) by 2014, which declared a caliphate across Iraq and Syria.^[83] Coalition operations against ISIS from 2014 to 2019 reclaimed territory but relied on local proxies and airstrikes, as ISIS shifted to asymmetric tactics like tunnel networks and lone-wolf attacks post-territorial defeat.^[84] Drone strikes emerged as a hallmark of asymmetric engagements, with the U.S. conducting over 14,000 strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia from 2002 to 2020 to target al-Qaeda affiliates and others, minimizing ground troop risks but sustaining low-intensity conflicts without decisive resolution.^[85] These operations, often in ungoverned spaces, correlated with civilian casualties estimated at 800-1,700 in Pakistan alone, fueling recruitment for groups like the Taliban and al-Shabaab, thus perpetuating cycles of retaliation.^[86] Overall, post-9/11 wars incurred approximately $8 trillion in U.S. expenditures by 2023, with over 7,000 U.S. service member deaths and 38,000 suicides among veterans, highlighting how asymmetric dynamics extended commitments without clear endpoints. Such conflicts underscore causal factors in perpetual engagement: insurgents' ability to blend with civilians evades conventional firepower, while political thresholds for escalation deter full-spectrum responses, leading to indefinite advisory roles or air campaigns as seen in ongoing U.S. operations in Somalia against al-Shabaab since 2007.^[87] Empirical outcomes reveal limited strategic gains; for instance, al-Qaeda's core was degraded but its affiliates proliferated globally, with groups like ISIS inspiring attacks in over 30 countries by 2015.^[79] This pattern reflects not mere tactical asymmetry but structural incentives for sustained involvement, where withdrawal risks perceived vacuums enabling adversary reconstitution, as evidenced by the Taliban's 2021 resurgence controlling 80% of Afghan districts within weeks of U.S. exit.^[88]

Criticisms and Counterarguments

Claims of Militarization and Imperial Overreach

Critics of U.S. foreign policy contend that the nation's engagement in prolonged conflicts reflects a deep-seated militarization of its institutions and society, perpetuated by the military-industrial complex (MIC) first warned against by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his 1961 farewell address. Eisenhower cautioned that the "conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry" posed a risk of "unwarranted influence" on American priorities, potentially prioritizing defense contracts over genuine security needs.^[89] Contemporary analysts extend this critique, arguing that the MIC incentivizes endless wars to sustain profits, with post-9/11 conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan alone costing an estimated $8 trillion and resulting in over 900,000 deaths, while benefiting defense contractors through revolving-door employment and lobbying.^[90]^[91] A core element of these claims involves imperial overreach, exemplified by the U.S. maintenance of approximately 800 military bases across 70 countries, which scholars like Chalmers Johnson argue fosters resentment and "blowback" terrorism rather than deterring threats. In his 2000 book Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, Johnson posited that America's post-World War II empire-building—through interventions in Korea (1950–1953), Vietnam (1955–1975), and later Grenada (1983) and Panama (1989)—creates self-perpetuating cycles of violence, as covert operations and basing provoke anti-U.S. backlash, exemplified by the 1993 World Trade Center bombing linked to Afghan mujahideen trained during the 1980s Soviet conflict.^[92] Johnson's subsequent works, The Sorrows of Empire (2004) and Nemesis (2006), further assert that this global footprint, spanning over 100,000 troops abroad as of 2004, exemplifies hubristic expansion akin to historical empires like Rome, leading to fiscal strain and domestic democratic erosion.^[93] Andrew J. Bacevich, a retired U.S. Army colonel and historian, reinforces these arguments by critiquing the bipartisan "Washington Rules" that normalize permanent war as a creed of global primacy, where military solutions supplant diplomacy and economic tools. In Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War (2010), Bacevich traces this to the early Cold War era, arguing that doctrines like containment evolved into proactive interventions—such as the 2003 Iraq invasion justified on flawed intelligence—sustaining a state of perpetual mobilization that diverts resources from domestic needs and erodes constitutional checks on executive war powers.^[94] He notes that since 1945, the U.S. has engaged in over 200 military actions, many undeclared, framing this as imperial ambition masked as defense, with the Obama administration's 2011 Libya intervention and expansion of drone strikes exemplifying continuity despite rhetorical shifts.^[95] Proponents of these views often highlight empirical indicators of militarization, such as the U.S. defense budget exceeding $800 billion annually in 2023—more than the next ten nations combined—and the cultural glorification of military service amid declining veteran representation in Congress (from 18% in 1970 to under 20% in recent sessions). Critics like Bacevich and Johnson attribute this to institutional capture, where think tanks and media amplify threat narratives to justify expansion, though such analyses have faced pushback for underemphasizing geopolitical necessities like countering Soviet or Chinese influence. Nonetheless, these claims posit that without retrenchment, imperial overreach risks collapse through overstretch, as seen in historical precedents like Britain's post-Suez decline.^[96]^[97]

Empirical Evidence for Security-Driven Continuity

Empirical analyses of U.S. overseas military deployments demonstrate that forward presence enhances deterrence by raising adversaries' perceived costs of aggression, thereby contributing to strategic continuity in engagements. A RAND Corporation study utilizing historical case data and statistical modeling found that U.S. forces abroad, particularly in larger numbers and integrated with allies, correlate with fewer adversary-initiated military actions, as they signal credible commitment and rapid response capabilities.^[98] Similarly, assessments of U.S. basing posture indicate that sustained presence supports contingency responsiveness and ally assurance, reducing the likelihood of regional escalations that could draw in the U.S.^[99] Post-World War II data underscores this continuity, with no great-power wars occurring since 1945, a period marked by consistent U.S. military forward deployment in Europe and Asia that underpinned extended deterrence against Soviet expansion.^[100] In Europe, U.S. troop commitments under NATO frameworks deterred direct Warsaw Pact invasions throughout the Cold War, as evidenced by declassified intelligence assessments showing Soviet calculations of high risks due to American reinforcement pledges and on-site forces.^[69] This pattern persisted post-Cold War, where U.S. presence on NATO's eastern flank has constrained Russian adventurism, with analyses indicating that reduced deployments would heighten invasion probabilities in vulnerable states.^[101] Instances of withdrawal further illustrate the security rationale for continuity, as abrupt disengagements have empirically amplified threats requiring re-intervention. The 2011 U.S. troop drawdown from Iraq created governance vacuums that enabled the Islamic State (ISIS) to seize territory across Anbar Province and declare a caliphate by June 2014, controlling over 100,000 square kilometers and prompting a U.S.-led coalition return with airstrikes and advisors to reclaim lost ground.^[102] In Afghanistan, the 2021 withdrawal facilitated the Taliban's swift reconquest of Kabul on August 15, 2021, followed by the sheltering of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in a Kabul safe house until his death in a U.S. drone strike on July 31, 2022, heightening global terrorism export risks as ISIS-K conducted attacks like the March 2024 Moscow concert hall assault killing 144.^[103]^[88] These cases reveal how security-driven persistence mitigates power vacuums exploited by non-state actors and revisionist states, sustaining engagements to forestall costlier future conflicts.

Societal and Global Impacts

Domestic Political and Economic Effects

Prolonged engagement in conflicts, particularly the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and related operations, has imposed substantial economic burdens on the United States, with total budgetary costs exceeding $8 trillion as of 2023, encompassing direct military appropriations, veterans' medical and disability care projected into future decades, and interest payments on debt-financed expenditures.^[104] These wars, spanning over two decades, have been funded primarily through borrowing, contributing over $2.2 trillion in interest costs alone by 2023, equivalent to more than the combined discretionary budgets for education, training, employment, social services, housing, and community development from 2001 to 2023. U.S. military expenditure has averaged approximately 3.5-4% of GDP annually since 2001, elevated compared to the late 1990s average below 3%, sustaining absolute spending levels above $800 billion yearly by the 2020s despite GDP growth.^[105] ^[106] This sustained defense outlay generates opportunity costs by diverting resources from productive civilian investments; empirical analyses indicate that each dollar spent on military activities yields fewer jobs—about 7-11 per million dollars—than equivalent investments in education or infrastructure, which create 15-26 jobs per million.^[107] Macroeconomic studies further reveal a negative correlation between high military spending and long-term economic growth, as it crowds out private sector capital formation and innovation in non-defense sectors, with RAND Corporation research estimating that expansive defense budgets reduce overall GDP growth potential by reallocating funds from higher-multiplier domestic programs.^[108] ^[109] While defense industries employ millions and spur technological spillovers, such as GPS advancements, these benefits are offset by inefficiencies in a sector reliant on non-competitive government contracts, leading to cost overruns documented in Government Accountability Office reports exceeding $200 billion annually in the 2010s.^[110] Domestically, perpetual war has entrenched political dynamics favoring militarized priorities, exemplified by the military-industrial complex's lobbying influence, where defense contractors donated over $10 million to key congressional committees between 2017 and 2020, correlating with a $45 billion increase in Department of Defense authorizations.^[49] This complex, comprising firms like Lockheed Martin and Boeing, sustains bipartisan support for high spending through campaign contributions and revolving-door employment, with over 700 former Pentagon officials joining industry roles since 2001, fostering policies that prioritize procurement over fiscal restraint.^[111] The framework of endless counterterrorism operations has normalized executive branch dominance in war powers, diminishing congressional oversight; authorizations like the 2001 AUMF have justified interventions without new declarations, enabling rapid military expansions while domestic legislative focus shifts to security appropriations.^[112] Civil liberties have eroded under the rationale of perpetual threat, with the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001—enacted in response to 9/11 and extended amid ongoing wars—vastly expanding surveillance authorities, including warrantless wiretaps and bulk data collection under Section 215, which the ACLU documents as enabling NSA programs affecting millions of Americans without individualized suspicion.^[113] These measures, renewed multiple times through 2020, have chilled dissent and disproportionately targeted Muslim and Arab communities, with over 1,200 detentions under material support provisions by 2003 lacking due process, as critiqued in congressional hearings for prioritizing security over Fourth Amendment protections.^[114] Politically, war perpetuation diverts public discourse from inequality and infrastructure decay, as evidenced by Gallup polls showing military spending consistently ranking higher in voter priorities during conflict eras despite stagnant median wages and rising debt-to-GDP ratios exceeding 120% by 2023.^[112] This dynamic reinforces a national security state, where ending wars risks political backlash from vested interests, perpetuating fiscal imbalances that constrain responses to domestic challenges like healthcare costs, which consume 18% of GDP.^[45]

Effects on International Order and Stability

Prolonged military engagements associated with perpetual war have undermined key pillars of the international legal order, particularly by expanding interpretations of self-defense and preemptive action, allowing states to justify indefinite operations against non-state actors without traditional declarations of war or UN Security Council approvals.^[115]^[116] This shift, evident in U.S.-led counterterrorism campaigns post-2001, has normalized extraterritorial drone strikes and special operations in multiple sovereign territories, eroding constraints under Article 51 of the UN Charter and contributing to a precedent of unilateral force that weakens collective security mechanisms.^[117]^[118] Such practices foster selective enforcement of international norms, diminishing trust in institutions like the United Nations and accelerating the decline of the post-World War II rules-based system. Interventions in Libya (2011) and Syria have exemplified this, where initial humanitarian rationales devolved into fragmented state failures, enabling proxy competitions among great powers and non-state groups, which in turn violate sovereignty norms without accountability.^[119] Foreign-imposed regime changes, occurring in 72 instances since 1800 with U.S. involvement in six since 1945, consistently heighten the risk of civil wars by creating power vacuums, as seen in Iraq post-2003 where the toppling of Saddam Hussein precipitated sectarian violence and the emergence of ISIS.^[120]^[121] On global stability, perpetual wars exacerbate economic interdependencies' vulnerabilities, disrupting trade routes, energy supplies, and supply chains; for instance, the Russia-Ukraine conflict since 2022 has triggered energy price spikes exceeding 300% in Europe initially and contributed to food insecurity affecting 345 million people worldwide via Black Sea grain export halts.^[122] Protracted conflicts delay progress on all 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals by over five years in affected regions, with SDG 9 (industry, innovation, infrastructure) and SDG 4 (quality education) most impacted due to destroyed infrastructure and displaced populations totaling over 100 million refugees and internally displaced persons as of 2023.^[123] This cascades into heightened migration pressures and proxy escalations, as in the Sahel where post-intervention instability from Libya has fueled jihadist expansions, challenging regional alliances like ECOWAS.^[124] The cumulative effect is a transition toward multipolar volatility, where endless engagements signal eroding U.S. hegemony and invite revisionist challenges, such as China's South China Sea assertions or Russia's territorial revisions, without restoring deterrence.^[125] RAND analyses indicate that permanent war postures strain alliances like NATO, as uneven burden-sharing—U.S. defense spending at 3.5% of GDP versus allies' 1-2%—breeds resentment and reduces collective response efficacy to hybrid threats.^[125] While proponents argue such engagements maintain order through power projection, empirical patterns show they often perpetuate cycles of violence, with U.S. interventions since 1945 correlating to prolonged instability in 70% of cases rather than swift stabilization.^[126]^[127]

Cultural and Intellectual Representations

In Literature, Fiction, and Media

George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) portrays a dystopian world where three superstates—Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia—engage in perpetual war over disputed territories, not for territorial gain but to consume manufactured goods, prevent economic improvement for the masses, and sustain hierarchical control by the ruling Party.^[15] The conflict, detailed in the forbidden book by Emmanuel Goldstein, shifts alliances unpredictably to maintain the illusion of existential threat, channeling public energies into hatred and obedience while justifying rationing and surveillance.^[128] This mechanism ensures that peace, which would allow reflection and potential rebellion, remains impossible, as "a peace that is truly permanent would be the same as a permanent war."^[129] Joe Haldeman's The Forever War (1974), drawing from the author's Vietnam War experiences, depicts an interstellar conflict between humans and the alien Taurans that spans centuries due to relativistic time dilation, rendering the war endless for soldiers who return to a radically changed Earth after each deployment.^[130] The novel illustrates how prolonged engagements erode soldiers' connections to home, foster alienation, and perpetuate military bureaucracy without resolution, mirroring real-world critiques of Vietnam as a quagmire with no clear victory conditions.^[131] Haldeman's narrative underscores the psychological toll of such wars, where tactical advances fail to end hostilities, emphasizing futility over heroism.^[132] In media, the Netflix film War Machine (2017), directed by David Michôd and starring Brad Pitt, satirizes U.S. military efforts in Afghanistan from 2006 onward as a politically motivated escalation lacking feasible exit strategies, portraying generals as pursuing metrics of progress amid indefinite commitment.^[133] Adapted loosely from journalist Ben Fountain's Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk but focused on real figures like General Stanley McChrystal, it critiques how domestic politics and media narratives sustain operations despite local resistance and strategic stalemate.^[134] Similarly, the Warhammer 40,000 franchise, originating in tabletop games since 1987 and expanding to video games and animations, envisions a galaxy-spanning perpetual war where humanity's Imperium fights ceaselessly against xenos, heretics, and Chaos forces, using the grimdark aesthetic to explore themes of inevitable decay and unending vigilance without triumph.^[135]

References

[1]
[PDF] Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace: How We Got to BeSo Hated
Gore Vidal's book, 'Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace,' challenges American foreign policy and security, written after 9/11, but much of the material predates ...
[2]
[PDF] Perpetual Warfare: Proposing a New American Constitutional ...
Since September 11, 2001 (“9/11”), the United States of America has used its military as a bedrock of American foreign policy, leading some to.
[3]
U.S. Foreign Policy Increasingly Relies on Military Interventions
Oct 16, 2023 · ... U.S. has been involved in 393 military interventions in other nations since 1776. More than 200 of those have been since 1945, and 114 in ...
[4]
Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2023
This report lists hundreds of instances in which the United States has used its Armed Forces abroad in situations of military conflict or potential conflict.
[5]
Global U.S. Troop Deployment, 1950-2003 | The Heritage Foundation
Oct 27, 2004 · On average, 2.3 million U.S. troops were on duty per year from 1950–2000. Of this average, 535,000 troops (23 percent of all military personnel) ...
[6]
President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)
Jul 15, 2024 · On January 17, 1961, in this farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned against the establishment of a "military-industrial complex."
[7]
[PDF] “Farewell Address.” ‍ - Eisenhower Presidential Library
IN THE COUNCILS of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
[8]
[PDF] Ending Perpetual War? Constitutional War Termination Powers and ...
Apr 15, 2014 · This Article presents a framework for interpreting the constitutional war termination powers of Congress and the President and applies this.
[9]
https://phys.uri.edu/~nigh/MilitaryIntervention.pdf
[10]
What is a Perpetual War? - Boot Camp & Military Fitness Institute
Jan 4, 2023 · Perpetual war, endless war, or a forever war, is a lasting state of war with no clear conditions that would lead to its conclusion.
[11]
Perpetual War Definition & Meaning | YourDictionary
Perpetual War definition: Incessant and interminable military combat .
[12]
The Price of Perpetual War - War on the Rocks
May 24, 2016 · The United States has entered an era of perpetual war. The U.S. military has been at war for 15 straight years with no end in sight, ...
[13]
Endless War: A Term with a History and a Definition - New America
Endless war. It's a term that, along with that of similar phrases like “permanent war” and “forever war,” has grown in usage in the post-9/11 era.1 In ...
[14]
[PDF] Perputual War for Perpetual Peace - Mises Institute
... perpetual war for perpetual peace." Events since that time. (June, 1947) have further reinforced Beard's sagacity and insight in this respect. George ...
[15]
Totalitarianism and Perpetual War: 1984, A Case Study
Feb 5, 2018 · Perpetual war is important, Goldstein argues, because war extracts cheap foreign labor, which distracts the masses and ultimately keeps citizens ...
[16]
Decoding Perpetual War - The Geostrata
Apr 21, 2024 · In conclusion, various reasons lead to the phenomenon of perpetual war. It is apparent that modern warfare has steadily become a complicated ...
[17]
Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace | Free Essay Example - StudyCorgi
Sep 19, 2024 · The term perpetual war is used to refer to unending or continuous warfare (Vidal 14). Thus, perpetual peace refers to everlasting peace (Vidal ...
[18]
Introduction: Perpetual War - jstor
War [polemos] is both father of all and king of all: it reveals the gods on the one hand and humans on the other, makes slaves on the one hand, the free on the ...Missing: foundations | Show results with:foundations
[19]
Tracing Hobbes in Realist International Relations Theory
Feb 22, 2022 · The realist school of international relations is known to draw heavily from the political thought of Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli.
[20]
Political Realism in International Relations
Jul 26, 2010 · Realism, also known as political realism, is a view of international politics that stresses its competitive and conflictual side.The Roots of the Realist... · Twentieth Century Classical... · Neorealism
[21]
Realism, Liberalism and War - E-International Relations
Nov 22, 2023 · Realists and liberals are divided when it comes to understanding why war exists, and what can be done about it.
[22]
Guide to the classics: Immanuel Kant's Toward Perpetual Peace and ...
Mar 23, 2022 · Kant's essay takes the form of a philosophical project aimed at achieving perpetual peace. To be perpetual, a peace must not merely be temporary, like a ...
[23]
Full article: Clausewitz and the politics of war: A contemporary theory
Oct 15, 2018 · This paper re-examines the theoretical underpinnings of Strategic Studies, proposing a novel theory and a new framework for analysing war's fundamental ...
[24]
Neo-Assyrian Empire - World History Edu
Feb 11, 2025 · By the late seventh century BC, perpetual warfare had overextended the empire and alienated many subject peoples. Simultaneously, the empire's ...
[25]
Assyrian Warfare - World History Encyclopedia
May 2, 2018 · The Assyrian war machine was the most efficient military force in the ancient world up until the fall of the empire in 612 BCE.Missing: perpetual | Show results with:perpetual
[26]
Messenian War(s) - Sparta Reconsidered
... Sparta became a militarized society. Only sustained conflict and perpetual threat could force a society to adapt a system of government that is so ...
[27]
The Fearful Secret at the Heart of Ancient Sparta
Jan 16, 2024 · Sparta's famous militarism was inseparable from the all-consuming fear the Spartans had of their oppressed neighbors.
[28]
Full article: A warlike culture? Religion and war in the Aztec world
Oct 18, 2022 · The Aztec practice of warfare was rooted in the mythical histories – rich cyclical narratives blending fact and myth (Gillespie Citation1989, xi ...
[29]
Aztec Warriors: The Flower Wars - History on the Net
Flower Wars were ceremonial wars for captives, arranged after a famine, where warriors were captured for sacrifice, not killed.Missing: perpetual | Show results with:perpetual
[30]
The Aztec flower wars - Heritage Daily
Feb 19, 2023 · The flower wars were semi-ritual battles fought between members of the Aztec Triple Alliance and surrounding city-states.Missing: perpetual | Show results with:perpetual
[31]
Timeline Of 20th And 21st Century Wars | Imperial War Museums
The 20th century saw conflict every year, with 187 million estimated deaths. Examples include the Boer War (1899-1902), WWI (1914-1918), and the War in ...
[32]
How Perpetual War Became U.S. Ideology - The Atlantic
May 11, 2011 · The United States has found itself in a seemingly endless series of wars over the past two decades. Despite frequent opposition by the party ...
[33]
U.S. Defense Spending in Historical and International Context
May 14, 2024 · Defense spending increased to about 6% of GDP during the Reagan Administration while the “peace dividend” brought spending down to roughly 3% of ...
[34]
The Truman Doctrine, 1947 - Office of the Historian
The Truman Doctrine arose from a speech delivered by President Truman before a joint session of Congress on March 12, 1947.
[35]
https://www.britannica.com/event/Korean-War
[36]
Vietnam War | Facts, Summary, Years, Timeline ... - Britannica
Sep 18, 2025 · The U.S. military reported 58,220 American casualties. Although North Vietnamese and Viet Cong casualty counts vary wildly, it is generally ...The United States enters the war · The fall of South Vietnam · The Gulf of Tonkin
[37]
U.S. launched 251 military interventions since 1991, and 469 since ...
Sep 16, 2022 · The United States launched at least 251 military interventions between 1991 and 2022. This is according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
[38]
[PDF] Mearsheimer, J.J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New ...
Offensive Realism This book offers a realist theory of international politics that challenges the prevailing optimism about relations among the great powers. ...Missing: necessities | Show results with:necessities
[39]
The evolution of offensive realism | Politics and the Life Sciences
Offensive realism, a theory of international relations, holds that states are disposed to competition and conflict because they are self-interested, ...
[40]
Full article: The Security Dilemma: A Conceptual Analysis
Oct 8, 2009 · The security dilemma has been deployed to help explain major events, such as the First World War,Footnote the origins and end of the Cold War, ...
[41]
Can the security dilemma explain actual conflicts?
Jan 17, 2012 · The concept of the security dilemma describes how it is possible, given the “existential uncertainty” which the condition of international anarchy produces ...
[42]
Does Anyone Still Understand the 'Security Dilemma'?
Jul 26, 2022 · the security dilemma describes how the actions that one state takes to make itself more secure—building armaments, putting military forces on ...
[43]
[PDF] Classic Realism and the Balance of Power Theory
The state of anarchy is permanent in the international system: "war lurks in the background of international politics just as revolution lurks in the background.
[44]
Profits of War: Top Beneficiaries of Pentagon Spending, 2020 – 2024
Jul 8, 2025 · The military-industrial complex involves the collaboration of the uniformed military and the arms industry in promoting spending that serves ...
[45]
PGPF Chart Pack: Defense Spending - Peterson Foundation
Jul 3, 2025 · Defense spending is projected to fall further below its historical share of GDP. Defense Discretionary Spending (% of GDP). 1975 1985 1995 ...
[46]
The Effects of Military Spending on Economic Growth
Over a 20-year period, a 1% increase in military spending will decrease a country's economic growth by 9%. Increased military spending is especially detrimental ...
[47]
U.S. Federal Budget | Costs of War - Brown University
U.S. military spending produces an average of five jobs per $1 million in ... We Get What We Pay For: The Cycle of Military Spending, Industry Power, and Economic ...
[48]
Political Footprint of the Military Industry
Oct 31, 2024 · The military industry has consistently spent more than $100 million per year lobbying policymakers to influence policies and spending decisions that support ...
[49]
Military-Industrial Complex Clinches Nearly 450,000% Return on ...
Jul 7, 2022 · After industry gives $10 million to congressional defense committee members, DOD receives potential $45 billion spending increase.
[50]
The Pentagon's Revolving Door Keeps Spinning: 2021 in Review
Jan 20, 2022 · In 2021, at least 36 officials left the Pentagon to join private defense firms. Those firms received over $89 billion in contract ...
[51]
New Revelations Underscore Need To Curb Defense Revolving Door
May 3, 2023 · It documents “672 cases in 2022 in which the top 20 defense contractors had former government officials, military officers, Members of Congress ...<|separator|>
[52]
[PDF] DEFENSE SPENDING AND THE ECONOMY - Mercatus Center
Similarly, the economy grew a respectable 3.3 percent annually from 1978 through 2000, even as the share of defense spending dropped from 7.4 percent of. GDP to ...
[53]
How the Military-Industrial Complex Gets Its Power and Harms ...
231 more than there are members of Congress. (Two-thirds of the ...
[54]
What Thucydides Teaches Us About War, Politics, and the Human ...
Aug 9, 2017 · Thucydides' pessimistic answer seems to be “No”: War was inevitable, we are told, when emergent power Athens contested Sparta's supremacy 2,500 ...
[55]
Thucydides and Never-Ending War - The Imaginative Conservative
Apr 15, 2015 · Thucydides' account of the twenty-seven-year war between Athens and Sparta is filled with timeless questions about human conflict: When are ...
[56]
The Domestic Analogy Revisited: Hobbes on International Order
Jan 3, 2016 · As with the interpersonal state of nature, Hobbes's claim was not that states are constantly making outright war—though that may be so—but ...
[57]
Thomas Hobbes: Moral and Political Philosophy
The state of nature is “natural” in one specific sense only. For Hobbes political authority is artificial: in the “natural” condition human beings lack ...Missing: perpetual | Show results with:perpetual
[58]
[PDF] Conflict, War and Revolution - Machiavelli - LSE Research Online
depends on the view that human nature is broadly constant over time. He asserts: that anyone wishing to see what is to be must consider what has been: all.
[59]
Imperialism and conflict in Machiavelli's political thought - Ετερολογίες
Jul 3, 2021 · Machiavelli demonstrates that conflict is constantly present both in the interior and the exterior of the republic, and external conflict can ...
[60]
What Is Deterrence? - CFR Education - Council on Foreign Relations
May 24, 2023 · In this free resource, explore examples of deterrence from the Cold War to present day to learn how countries dissuade bad behavior with the ...Missing: strength | Show results with:strength<|separator|>
[61]
[PDF] The Great Divide in US Deterrence Thought - Air University
Also, as noted, the absence of war among great powers since the end of. World War II suggests the predictable reliability of nuclear deterrence: “Never since ...
[62]
The Power of Deterrence | YIP Institute
In fact, it is widely theorized that the reason that the Cold War did not escalate to direct war between the US and Russia was the use of nuclear deterrence.
[63]
Five myths of nuclear deterrence - ICAN
Myth two: Nuclear deterrence keeps the peace. There is no evidence that nuclear weapons deter war beyond the correlation of their existence with the fact they ...<|separator|>
[64]
Peace Through Strength - Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
We know only too well that war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong, but when they are weak. It is then that tyrants are tempted.Missing: theory | Show results with:theory
[65]
PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH - Weekly Column - Deb Fischer
Jul 3, 2013 · Reagan outlined this doctrine in a 1983 speech, saying, “We know that peace is the condition under which mankind was meant to flourish. Yet ...
[66]
Reagan's “Peace through Strength” Cold War Strategy
President Reagan's often mocked strategy of “peace through strength” won the Cold War. Critical to that success were his nuclear deterrent polices.Missing: examples | Show results with:examples
[67]
Principle of Peace Through Strength - Constituting America
May 25, 2023 · The basic premise of PTS is that if the United States builds a military capability so great, with an extraordinary over-match ratio to potential attackers,Missing: examples | Show results with:examples
[68]
Deterrence: what it can (and cannot) do - NATO Review
Apr 20, 2015 · History abounds with examples of deterrence failing despite a balance of forces, and even cases in which the weaker side attacked the stronger.Missing: strength | Show results with:strength
[69]
American Deterrence Unpacked
For example, a recent historical analysis in Proceedings found that larger fleets were victorious in 25 of 28 naval wars. The analysis found, “When ...
[70]
Achieving “peace through strength” in the 2020s - Brookings Institution
Feb 21, 2025 · Executive summary · Deter war in several theaters at once by helping allies fend off attacks through forward-positioned “hold and defend” forces.Introduction · The context: Defense strategy... · Strengthening the defense...Missing: doctrine | Show results with:doctrine<|separator|>
[71]
When 'Peace Through Strength' Means 'War Is Peace' | Cato Institute
Oct 15, 2025 · Beginning with Gerald Ford and especially Ronald Reagan, “peace through strength” emerged as a way to signal realism as a third path between ...Missing: theory | Show results with:theory
[72]
Milestones: 1989-1992. The Gulf War, 1991 - Office of the Historian
The Gulf states' refusal to cancel Iraq's war debts contributed to Saddam Hussein's decision to make threats against Iraq's rich, but militarily weak, neighbor ...
[73]
The Gulf War's Afterlife: Dilemmas, Missed Opportunities, and the ...
Feb 2, 2021 · The Gulf War left policymakers with a dilemma that plagued successive US administrations. The war helped create an acute humanitarian crisis in Iraq.
[74]
A Chronology Of U.s. Military Interventions | Give War A Chance - PBS
Involving over 27,000 U.S. troops, the Panama invasion was, up to that time, the largest American military operation since the Vietnam War. Dubbed ...
[75]
[PDF] U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS SINCE 1890
The following is a partial list of U.S. military interventions from 1890 to 2019. This guide does not include: * mobilizations of the National Guard,.
[76]
Human | Costs of War | Brown University
An estimated over 940,000 people were killed by direct post-9/11 war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan between 2001-2023.U.S. Military, Veterans... · Civilians Killed & Displaced · Economic
[77]
Iraq Timeline: Since the 2003 War | United States Institute of Peace
ISIS launched a wave of attacks in Erbil, the Kurdish capital, in response to the Iraqi Kurds fighting jihadis in Syria. These attacks were the first in the ...
[78]
Timeline: The Iraq War - Council on Foreign Relations
In March 2003, US forces invaded Iraq vowing to destroy Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and end the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.<|separator|>
[79]
Asymmetry Is Strategy, Strategy Is Asymmetry - NDU Press
Theorists of contemporary conflict, whether describing asymmetric or unconventional wars, war among the ... war on terror” or “Long War” clearly indicates. One ...Missing: Global | Show results with:Global
[80]
Operation Enduring Freedom - Naval History and Heritage Command
Apr 22, 2024 · Operation Enduring Freedom officially began 7 October 2001 with American and British bombing strikes against al-Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan.Missing: asymmetric perpetual
[81]
Afghanistan War: How Did 9/11 Lead To A 20-Year War? | IWM
In 2001 an international coalition led by the USA invaded Afghanistan to destroy terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda when the Taliban refused to hand over Osama ...
[82]
Re-Thinking the Strategic Approach to Asymmetrical Warfare
The following will examine the legacy understanding of asymmetric warfare, the consequences of legacy asymmetric thinking, why this thinking might persist, and ...Missing: 21st outcomes
[83]
Bad Guys Know What Works: Asymmetric Warfare and the Third Offset
Jun 23, 2015 · We have seen how America's struggles in Iraq and Afghanistan have made it more reluctant to use ground forces against the Islamic State in Iraq ...
[84]
From Caliphate to Caves: The Islamic State's Asymmetric War in ...
The Islamic State's construction of cave and tunnel complexes in northern Iraq began well before the demise of the Islamic State's territorial caliphate, with ...
[85]
Asymmetrical Warfare: A Game-Changer in Modern Conflict - Sentrycs
Dec 15, 2024 · Asymmetrical warfare is characterized by an imbalance of power between opposing forces, where weaker adversaries adopt unconventional tactics.
[86]
https://visionofhumanity.org/how-drones-have-shaped-the-nature-of-conflict/
[87]
Asymmetric Warfare - RAND
The United States should address broader national security risks beyond terrorism by consolidating irregular warfare ... the global war on terror have been ...Missing: characteristics | Show results with:characteristics
[88]
Instability in Afghanistan | Global Conflict Tracker
After the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in August 2021, the Taliban rapidly regained control of the country and the government in Kabul. Despite ...Missing: asymmetric perpetual
[89]
Eisenhower's Warning: The Military-Industrial Complex Forty Years ...
Eisenhower warned of the dangers of "undue influence" exerted by the "military-industrial complex." He cautioned that maintaining a large, permanent military ...
[90]
The military-industrial complex is killing us all - MR Online
Jun 4, 2024 · The MIC has sowed incomprehensible destruction globally, keeping the United States locked in endless wars that, since 2001, have killed an estimated 4.5 ...
[91]
The Military-Industrial Complex Has Never Been Worse - Jacobin
The military-industrial complex (MIC) that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned Americans about more than sixty years ago is still alive and well.
[92]
Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire ...
In this incisive and controversial book, Chalmers Johnson lays out in vivid detail the dangers faced by our overexted empire, which insists on projecting its ...Missing: overreach | Show results with:overreach
[93]
Chalmers Johnson - The American Empire Project
Chalmers Johnson was the president of the Japan Policy Research Institute, and the author of the bestselling books Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire, and Nemesis.Missing: overreach | Show results with:overreach
[94]
Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War - Amazon.com
In a vivid, incisive analysis, Andrew J. Bacevich succinctly presents the origins of this consensus, forged at a moment when American power was at its height.
[95]
American Imperium, by Andrew J. Bacevich - Harper's Magazine
Consider an alternative take on the twentieth-century U.S. military experience, with a post-9/11 codicil included for good measure. Like the established ...<|separator|>
[96]
Perpetual War Cultivates Militarism - Hannah Arendt Center
Mar 13, 2021 · There are something like 800 US military bases in 70 countries around the world. And yet we still have poverty, crime, and drugs, there are ...
[97]
America Is Being Chain-Ganged Into a War
Jun 18, 2025 · America is being chain-ganged into a war. Empires collapse due to overstretch and insolvency. More often than not, the public wills it.
[98]
Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces - RAND
Feb 4, 2020 · This report provides empirical evidence on the deterrent effects of US overseas military forces. It investigates how these effects might vary by the type, size ...Missing: abroad | Show results with:abroad
[99]
U.S. Overseas Military Posture: Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits
Apr 29, 2013 · Overseas presence contributes to contingency responsiveness, deterrence of adversaries and assurance of allies, and security cooperation with partners.
[100]
Deterrence Ensures Great Power Competition Doesn't Become War ...
Dec 7, 2021 · The rules-based architecture has prevented great power war since 1945. Milley doesn't mind competition with China or anyone else, but he ...
[101]
Deterring Russia: U.S. Military Posture in Europe - CSIS
Jan 27, 2025 · The United States needs a long-term military presence in Europe focused on NATO's eastern flank to deter Russian aggression.
[102]
The Continuing Threat of ISIS in Iraq after the Withdrawal of the ...
Apr 4, 2024 · Without active and continuous deterrence, ISIS forces may look to take advantage of the deteriorating security and governance situation in areas formerly under ...Missing: timeline | Show results with:timeline
[103]
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/getting-answers-on-afghanistan-withdrawal
[104]
Economic | Costs of War - Brown University
Wars lead to increased budgetary costs decades into the future, including financial obligations to veterans as well as interest owed on the debt used to finance ...
[105]
Military expenditure (% of GDP) - United States | Data
Military expenditure (% of GDP) - United States. Yearbook: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ( ...
[106]
U.S. Military Spending/Defense Budget | Historical Chart & Data
U.S. military spending/defense budget for 2023 was 916.01 billion US dollars, a 6.43% increase from 2022. U.S. military spending/defense budget for 2022 was ...
[107]
Other Costs to the U.S. Economy | Costs of War - Brown University
May 24, 2017 · One of the most significant opportunity costs of military spending is in job creation. Research has consistently shown that dollar for dollar, ...
[108]
[PDF] How Does Defense Spending Affect Economic Growth? - RAND
However, defense spending also has opportunity costs because it diverts resources from government programs that might do more to promote growth.
[109]
Full article: The Impact of Military Expenditures on Economic Growth
... employment opportunities, transfer of military technology ... military expenditure/GDP decreases economic growth by approximately 1.10 percentage points.<|separator|>
[110]
Impact of Military Spending on Economic Growth and Innovation
Military spending has costs and benefits. It can increase a country's national debt and mean less money for schools, healthcare, and other social programs.Economic Impacts of Military... · Economic and Technological...
[111]
How the Military-Industrial Complex Captured US Democracy
Aug 9, 2025 · Hind Hassan travels to Washington to learn how these firms use their riches to buy influence – confronting the senators who receive hefty ...
[112]
How Will a Culture of Permanent War Impact America's Future?
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are projected to cost over $3 trillion, have also led to changes in domestic politics that have curtailed civil ...
[113]
End Mass Surveillance Under the Patriot Act - ACLU
The law amounted to an overnight revision of the nation's surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government's authority to spy on its own citizens.
[114]
[PDF] Oversight of the USA Patriot Act: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on ...
Apr 5, 2025 · To my mind, the worst provisions from a civil liberties standpoint are those addressing immigration and material support to "terrorist.
[115]
How the Expansion of "Self-Defense" Has Undermined Constraints ...
Sep 18, 2023 · This article will focus on twin sets of legal interpretations that have together been critical to creating and sustaining the perpetual war.Missing: norms | Show results with:norms
[116]
Book Release – Perpetual War and International Law - Just Security
Sep 11, 2025 · Introducing a new OUP book interrogating how precedents set in the post-9/11 era continue to shape contemporary conflicts.
[117]
How the Erosion of U.S. War Powers Constraints Has Eroded ...
May 25, 2023 · the erosion of U.S. law constraining unilateral presidential war power has had a direct effect—and a corrosive one—on the international law ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[118]
https://miamioh.ecampus.com/perpetual-war-international-law-enduring/bk/9780197749005
[119]
The Erosion of the Post-World War II International Order Due to ...
Apr 23, 2025 · The erosion of the post-World War II international order is not an irreversible phenomenon, but it demands immediate and coordinated action ...
[120]
The Failure of Regime-Change Operations | Cato Institute
Jan 6, 2020 · The most consistent finding on the effects of foreign-imposed regime change is the increased likelihood for civil war. Civil wars often ensue ...
[121]
[PDF] Impact of US Military Interventions on Regional Stability
But the long-term effects have often resulted in the formation of internal strife, political instability, and power vacuums, which have served as fertile ground ...
[122]
Protracted Conflicts: The enduring legacy of endless war
Aug 6, 2025 · This war has disrupted energy flows, trade networks, and global supply chains, underlining the susceptibility of regional crises to trigger ...
[123]
Assessing the impact of armed conflict on the progress of achieving ...
Dec 20, 2024 · Armed conflicts slow the achievement of all 17 SDGs. Armed conflicts delay progress in over half of the SDGs by more than 5%. SDG 9 and SDG 4 are the most ...
[124]
Protracted Conflicts: The enduring legacy of endless war
Nov 1, 2019 · The consequences of protracted armed conflicts are varied, including the cumulative effects of hostilities on infrastructure and health-care systems.
[125]
The Risks of Permanent War | RAND
Sep 28, 2018 · How would permanent war affect America's economic stability? A recent Brookings Institution assessment concludes ( PDF ) that the United States ...<|separator|>
[126]
Why Force Fails | Foreign Affairs
Mar 30, 2023 · The best-known foreign interventions—in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq—were large, long, and costly. But there have been dozens of other such ...
[127]
Cycles of Violence: Impact of US Intervention in Overseas Conflicts
Rather than leading to their quick resolution, American intervention has often driven further cycles of violence, prolonging these conflicts and requiring ...
[128]
1984 Book Two: Chapters IX & X Summary & Analysis | SparkNotes
These three nations keep their respective populaces preoccupied with a perpetual border war in order to preserve power among the High class. Goldstein writes ...
[129]
Suggesting 1984 reads, “A peace that is truly permanent would be ...
Sep 11, 2020 · Orwell's reasoning goes like this: by becoming continuous war ceases to exist. War is the opposite of peace and hence is regarded as an aberration.Why is Oceania only at war with one other nation in George Orwell's ...In Orwell's '1984,' The Party maintained a perpetual state of war as a ...More results from www.quora.comMissing: analysis | Show results with:analysis
[130]
The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War
Sep 18, 2015 · Joe Haldeman's The Forever War is an all-time science fiction classic, but it hasn't quite enjoyed the same degree of mass cultural saturation as other war- ...
[131]
Book Review: The Forever War by Joe Haldeman - by SF Fan
Jan 31, 2025 · In The Forever War, that feeling of alienation is taken to the extreme—Mandella comes back from each mission to an Earth that feels more and ...
[132]
What made 'The Forever War' such a good book? - Quora
Feb 28, 2020 · The Forever War was a science fiction novel written by Joe Haldeman in 1974. It was based on his experience in the Vietnam war and afterwards.
[133]
Netflix's 'War Machine' — Or: How I Learned To Question The ...
Jun 8, 2017 · ... Perpetual War Netflix continues venturing into original films with a satirical war film starring Brad Pitt. “What do …
[134]
Perpetual War: How Does the Global War on Terror Ever End? - FPIF
A decade of war is now ending,” Obama declared. “We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.”
[135]
Perpetual War in Warhammer 40k and Orwell's 1984 - Reddit
May 6, 2021 · This refers to Oceania's perpetual war with East Asia and Eurasia as a means of social and economic control. By unifying the population around a ...Missing: endless | Show results with:endless