America’s Conflicts from 1991 To 2026
and the Profit Logic of the Military-Industrial Complex

What exactly has the United States won after three and a half decades of near-continuous conflict? How many wars can a republic enter before war ceases to be an emergency and becomes a business model? When Washington speaks of security, deterrence, and stability, who is truly being stabilized: the American nation, or the revenue streams of the defense sector? And when the bill arrives, who pays it: the contractor with the backlog, or the taxpayer with the debt?

The blunt answer is this: from 1991 to 2026, the United States built not merely a warfighting machine, but a war-sustaining ecosystem. That ecosystem does not require every war to be “won” in the classical sense. It only requires that threat perceptions remain high, procurement pipelines remain full, Congress keeps appropriating, allies keep buying, and contractors keep scaling. The result is a grim asymmetry: national costs are diffused across taxpayers, future veterans’ care, debt service, and opportunity costs, while corporate gains are concentrated in contracts, backlogs, foreign military sales, political access, and the priceless marketing label of “combat-proven.” From 2020 to 2024 alone, private firms received about $2.4 trillion in Pentagon contracts, roughly 54% of Pentagon discretionary spending, up from 41% in the 1990s. Just five firms — Lockheed Martin, RTX, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman — received $771 billion in that five-year span.

The story begins with an exception that proves the rule. The 1991 Gulf War was costly in military terms, but unusually favorable to Washington fiscally because allies bore so much of the burden. GAO reported that by November 15, 1991, allied countries had pledged about $54 billion and contributed about $50.5 billion in cash and in-kind support. A CRS summary later noted that most Persian Gulf War costs were offset by allied contributions or absorbed by Department of Defense (DoD), leaving net costs to U.S. taxpayers of about $4.7 billion in current-year dollars. Desert Storm, in other words, was not yet the mature template of debt-financed, open-ended American war. It was coalition warfare with meaningful burden-sharing.

The 1990s then normalized a different habit: intervention without formal declarations, limited wars without clear end states, and sustained military activism even in the absence of a peer rival. Somalia showed how quickly humanitarian intervention could slide into mission creep. The Balkans, Bosnia and Kosovo, kept U.S. forces engaged in long-duration overseas operations well after the Cold War, while Iraq remained under recurring U.S. military pressure through no-fly-zone enforcement and periodic strikes. These interventions were smaller than what came later, but they mattered strategically: they preserved an expeditionary mindset, sustained operational tempo, and habituated Washington to the proposition that American force could be used frequently, incrementally, and without the political gravity once associated with war.

Then came 9/11, and with it the real structural shift. Afghanistan and Iraq were not simply wars; they were the institutional re-foundation of the modern military-industrial economy. According to the DoD’s own Section 1090 report, cumulative DoD war-related obligations through FY2024 totaled about $805.4 billion for Afghanistan and $895.0 billion for Iraq and Syria, or roughly $1.78 trillion combined. But that narrower DoD figure drastically understates the true public bill. Brown University’s Costs of War project estimates that the post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and elsewhere total about $8 trillion, excluding future interest costs, while care for post-9/11 veterans is projected to reach roughly $2.2 trillion to $2.5 trillion by 2050. Even after the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, the wars did not simply end; they mutated. Operation Enduring Sentinel continues as the U.S. framework for over-the-horizon counterterrorism related to Afghanistan, and Operation Inherent Resolve remained active into 2026 in Iraq and Syria.

That mutation is central to understanding the American model. Wars no longer need large occupation armies to remain profitable or politically durable. They can be rebranded as advisory missions, counterterror operations, proxy support, maritime security, air-defense replenishment, or strategic competition. Libya in 2011 fit that pattern. So did the renewed anti-ISIS campaign in Iraq and Syria beginning in 2014. So did U.S. support to Saudi operations linked to Yemen. So did the broader U.S. military activities in the Middle East after October 7, 2023. Brown estimated that those wider U.S. military actions in support of U.S., Israeli, and allied interests cost between $9.65 billion and $12.07 billion through September 2025. By early 2026, the cycle had tightened further: Reuters reported that the first two days of U.S. strikes on Iran consumed about $5.6 billion in munitions, and the White House then pressed major defense firms to boost production while the Pentagon moved to expand output of systems such as PAC-3 and THAAD.

This is where the military-industrial complex stops being a slogan and becomes a balance-sheet architecture. War generates demand. Demand generates appropriations. Appropriations generate contracts. Contracts generate backlogs. Backlogs justify capital expansion, lobbying muscle, workforce dispersion across congressional districts, and future appropriations. The Pentagon-contractor relationship is no longer incidental to war; it is one of the principal ways war is operationalized. Brown and Quincy found that from 2020 to 2024, private firms received $2.4 trillion from Pentagon spending, with the top five firms alone collecting $771 billion. That is not a side effect. That is the system.

The privatization of war is not just financial. It is organizational. Brown’s research has shown that contractors frequently outnumbered U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, meaning war was increasingly fought, maintained, transported, secured, and administered through private labor. Costs of War also estimates that 8,189 contractors for the U.S. military died in the post-9/11 wars. This matters because privatization alters democratic visibility. A war conducted partly through contractors is easier to sustain politically, easier to scale bureaucratically, and easier to mask in human and fiscal terms than a war borne only by uniformed troops.

Now look at the firms themselves. Lockheed Martin reported 2025 sales of $75.0 billion and a record backlog of $194 billion. More revealing than the numbers was management’s language: the company explicitly linked “unprecedented demand” to the combat-proven performance of its systems, performance it said had been demonstrated again in 2026. That is the war-economy loop in one sentence. The battlefield becomes showroom, validation lab, and export brochure. Northrop Grumman reported 2025 sales of $42.0 billion and a record $95.7 billion backlog. General Dynamics generated $52.6 billion in 2025 revenue and ended the year with $118 billion in backlog, with total estimated contract value of $179 billion. RTX reported adjusted net sales of $88.6 billion and a $268 billion backlog.

But here is the nuance that serious analysis requires: conflict does not mean every contractor prints effortless money on every program. Boeing’s Defense, Space & Security unit posted $27.2 billion in 2025 revenue, but its operating margin was slightly negative because of continued losses on the KC-46A. Northrop took a $477 million loss provision on the B-21 low-rate initial production phase. So, the argument is not that every war contract is a tidy cash machine. The argument is that the system, as a whole, keeps demand elevated, preserves market dominance, socializes risk, and guarantees that even when one program stumbles, the wider strategic environment still delivers new business, replenishment orders, export opportunities, and political indispensability.

Foreign sales are the second engine of the complex. Reuters reported that U.S. military equipment sales to foreign governments surged 29% in FY2024 to a record $318.7 billion, driven in part by replenishment demand connected to Ukraine and preparation for major conflicts. DSCA notifications in early 2026 underline the pattern: a possible $9.0 billion Saudi purchase of PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement missiles, a possible $3.8 billion Israeli purchase of AH-64E Apache helicopters, and other large packages flowing through the system. The United States thus profits twice — first from its own appropriations, then from allied anxiety. Washington’s wars, crises, and deterrence postures become demand multipliers for American arms exports.

The “otherwise” part of the benefit is political power. Brown’s findings explicitly identify lobbying, campaign donations, revolving-door hiring, think-tank funding, and participation in advisory bodies as tools through which the arms industry shapes the policy climate around Pentagon spending. A 2023 Senate report commissioned by Elizabeth Warren concluded that the revolving door between the Pentagon and major contractors was still spinning rapidly. This does not prove that every war is launched for corporate gain. That would be too crude and too easy. But it does show that once a war system is in place, the most organized, best-funded, and best-connected actors inside it are structurally positioned to keep it large, durable, and difficult to unwind.

So, is America losing nationally and economically in order to benefit private enterprises? If by “GDP loss” one means a literal subtraction from GDP, the answer is not that simple. Government defense spending enters national accounts as output; missile production, shipbuilding, aerospace manufacturing, logistics, and military R&D all add to measured GDP. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) says U.S. military spending reached $997 billion in 2024, equal to 3.4% of GDP and 37% of world military expenditure. In a narrow accounting sense, war spending can stimulate output. But that is not the same as saying it enriches the nation in any deep or durable sense. The World Bank’s own metadata notes that high military expenditures can burden economies and impede growth by consuming resources that could go elsewhere.

The better question, then, is not “Does war spending count in GDP?” but “What is the national return on that spending?” Here the American record looks far less flattering. Brown’s research finds military spending produces about 5 jobs per $1 million, versus roughly 9 in healthcare and nearly 13 in education. In other words, even on employment grounds, defense spending is a relatively weak way to mobilize public dollars. And because the post-9/11 wars were largely debt-financed, the burden compounds. Brown estimated that if war spending ceased immediately, interest payments on existing war debt would still rise to more than $6.5 trillion by 2050. Add to that the legacy of waste: the congressionally chartered Commission on Wartime Contracting concluded that between $31 billion and $60 billion had been lost to waste and fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then layer on basic financial dysfunction: Reuters reported in December 2025 that the Pentagon had failed its annual audit for the eighth consecutive year. That is not a portrait of a state extracting clean strategic value from vast expenditures. It is a portrait of institutional sprawl.

The honest verdict, then, is not that America wages war solely to make Lockheed Martin, Boeing, RTX, Northrop Grumman, or General Dynamics richer. States go to war for mixtures of fear, ideology, prestige, alliance commitments, bureaucratic momentum, threat inflation, electoral incentives, and strategic miscalculation. But once war begins — or once “permanent preparedness” replaces peace — the military-industrial complex ensures that private gain becomes embedded in public policy. America’s losses are nationalized: debt, veterans’ care, blown opportunity cost, damaged credibility, endless deployments, and missions that refuse to die. The gains are concentrated: contracts, backlogs, exports, political leverage, and a business model in which instability is rarely good for citizens but often excellent for order books.

Final Thoughts: The Arithmetic of Empire

The deepest American mistake since 1991 has not been war alone. It has been the conversion of war into infrastructure — budgetary, political, corporate, and psychological. Desert Storm was presented as a clean victory. Afghanistan was sold as necessity. Iraq was sold as pre-emption. Libya was sold as humanitarian urgency. Syria was sold as limited action. The anti-ISIS campaign was sold as containment. The post-October 7 Middle East buildup was sold as deterrence. Iran in 2026 is again being sold as strategic necessity. The labels keep changing. The expenditure logic does not.

That is why the question is no longer whether individual wars were justified on their opening day. The harder question is whether the American state has built an incentive structure in which war’s strategic failures do not meaningfully discipline war’s financial beneficiaries. When losses do not shrink the machine, the machine learns the wrong lesson. And that, more than any single contractor or any single president, is the real danger to the republic.

Image (c) istock.com