Bernard Brodie must be very upset in his grave for his famous dicta that “thus far the chief purpose of our military establishment has been to win wars. From now on its chief purpose must be to avert them. It can have almost no other useful purpose.” Because, the US military establishment to whom he was advising on the efficacy of nuclear deterrence, has been instrumental in waging wars and conflicts across the globe, without any fear of a nuclear exchange. Brodie was convinced that nuclear deterrence will always prove efficacious in avoiding all-out wars and therefore he even suggested that more may be better. However, on account that limited wars at the periphery will continue, he was right. Perhaps, he did not consider the obvious strengths of the military-industrial complex (MICs) in persuading the US Administration that war is a most beneficial business and must continue uninterrupted if the US wants to maintain its position on the victory stand. For wars and conflicts, the 21st Century is no different than the previous centuries. For wars and conflicts, the 21st Century is no different than the previous centuries. While the US does not face any major threat to its territorial security, thanks to the nature of its geography, its military remains at work across the globe at all times. The US MICs always have a plan ready for the next war even before an existing engagement comes to an end. While the US military was seriously involved in Afghanistan, the Mission Iraq was ready to unfold built on fake folders showing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) in Iraq, which were neither present there nor found ever during an unchallenged occupation of the country between 2003 to 2008. Interestingly, neither US military establishments nor the responsible US Administration ever feel ashamed of its unjustified military engagements and destruction of Unequal Military Powers (UMPs). Moreover, they do not even feel embarrassed about successive defeats that they receive at the hands of their much smaller and much weaker opponents, like Afghanistan. Strangely, the US Think Tanks are unable to convince successive US Administrations that protracted military engagements are counterproductive due to the high cost of modern wars and rising debts. For this reason alone, the US is fast losing its ground in Africa and perhaps the Middle East will be next. The question is at what stage will the US realize that China and Russia together are outpacing it even if the European allies remain intact? China and Russia from the forum of SCO and BRICS have surrounded Europe and in turn the US in a manner that the US is unable to play its cards independently. China and Russia want the US to remain at war in different parts of the world so that it continues to bleed even if it can sell its military equipment and technology to earn a few million or even billions of dollars here and there. The Ukraine war is an example of Russia’s strategy in this regard. While the US may have wanted Russia to bleed, instead it is the US and its European allies that are bleeding while feeding Ukraine in an unnecessary war. On the other hand, Israel is holding the US from its neck. The US cannot get rid of Israel’s demands of outright political, diplomatic, and military support for its unpopular wars against the Palestinians. Israel is making an all-out effort to engage Iran so that the conflict can be expanded and the US is forced to join another war in the Middle East, though the US is reluctant to do so. Since it is an election year in the US, therefore, it is even more difficult for the US to start a new war at this time even if Israel demands it. The wars may have been a profitable business in the olden days but not any more, especially when there are emerging players in the field. The US does not enjoy an immunity to its actions, either on the diplomatic front or on the battlefields. The deterrent value of the US is eroding very fast and if correction is not applied soon, it will become the shortest-lived sole superpower in history. China and Russia have bold and blessed leaders in the sense that they have continuity and support of their people in strategic decision-making. On the other hand, Europe is seeing the worst leadership of all time. However, neither the US nor Europe is recognizing this shortcoming when they are facing China and Russia. My advice to the US is to disengage from unnecessary wars and conflicts and consolidate the economy to retain the No. 1 position for a few more decades. The writer of this article has authored three international books: “Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan” “South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace” and “Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War.”