How America benefits from wars?

 The Taliban now has a significant gift in the form of state-of- the-modern helicopters, attack planes, rifles, machine guns, and Humvees - the most advanced American armament as the Americans have left Afghanistan. This is not a one-time occurrence; whether purposefully or unintentionally, the United States has a past of arming terrorist organizations, criminal groups, and renegade governments.

Long a major component of U.S. foreign policy, armaments sales have long been a source of controversy. Originally starting during the Cold War in the 1970s, the Nixon government developed the Nixon Doctrine—the practice of arming counter-Soviet expansion agents. With nations like Ethiopia, Laos, Cambodia, South Vietnam, and even Iran gaining from billions of dollars' worth of American weaponry, this was a notable rise in arms sales.
Still, this approach frequently backfired. For example, the significant arms shipments to the Shah during the 1970s finally resulted in the Islamic Revolution in 1979, therefore turning Iran from a U.S. friend into a fierce enemy. Comparably, in Panama, where the U.S. had been a significant military ally for most of the 20th century, the situation became hostile when General Manuel Noriega, a former CIA agent, came to power and led a U.S. invasion whereby American troops faced American weapons.

Weapons shipments to Iraq to oppose Iran carried this trend into the 1980s, only to find themselves in hot dispute with Iraq following its invasion of Kuwait. American tanks and missiles also arrived in Somalia, which sparked American military action in 1992. The U.S. armed the mujahideen against Soviet forces in Afghanistan, only to subsequently deal with the Taliban, a group derived from the mujahideen, guilty in the 9/11 attacks.

Notwithstanding these historical lessons, the U.S. continued to sell weapons, increasing following the 9/11 events. The United States has sold around $200 billion worth of conventional weaponry to 167 nations since 2001; many of these nations have records of anti-democratic policies and human rights abuses. Among the nations most at risk—including Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo—are those which get American weaponry most frequently.

Regardless of the political party in charge, this never-ending cycle of armaments sales benefits strategic objectives and American economy. It not only changes regional balances but also lets the U.S. influence client countries, get access to military sites, and persuade them to match U.S. goals at international venues like the United Nations.

The truth often runs counter to the American justification for its armaments sales—that they support democracy and peace. Frequently ending in the hands of non-state actors, American weaponry have driven wars and violations of human rights. American-made weapons have been abused by different parties from Syria to Yemen, underscoring the unexpected results of mass weapon sales.

Ultimately, the United States cannot simultaneously support conflicts and arming dubious governments while claiming to be champion of human rights, regional security, and world peace. The U.S. is a major cause of world insecurity rather than a supporter of peace and stability since the quest of economic advantages through military sales runs the danger of destabilizing areas and sustaining bloodshed.