The US has been continuously at war since the 1940s, sometimes via proxies, sometimes covertly, and sometimes, most obviously, the US kills, maims, bombs, burns, shoots, defoliates forests, destroys cities, and much more, by using its own military resources. Steve Chapman (Chicago Tribune, 2/21/16, sec. 1, p.23) calls attention to direct and more recent US military efforts when he writes: “the United States has been continuously at war for more than 14 years”. Moreover, he continues, “Military involvement in foreign conflicts is no longer unusual.” Consequently, military involvement doesn’t “warrant much attention from [presidential] candidates or the electorate. . . . The Republican candidates are amenable to sending more American troops to fight the Islamic state. . . . Hilary Clinton. . . . [is] prepared to deploy more [special operations killers]. . . . Bernie Sanders is the only candidate with a strong aversion to expanding the war” but, it seems to me, we need to remember that “aversion” by candidates doesn’t mean much–if anything–when it comes to war. Don’t forget that Obama’s campaign”aversion” to war did not stop America’s continuous warring.
“[O]ur military role”, Chapman continues, “in Syria and Iraq will probably expand. . . . Judging from the campaign so far, Americans have come to expect continual war no matter what. The next president is not likely to surprise them.” Actually, it’s continual war no matter which president is elected.
See also my post, United States Engaged in Perpetual War.