The aftermath of the Afghanistan pullout by the US troops has been a messy affair with the Taliban, whom they had been fighting against, taking control of the country even before the US had a chance to fully evacuate its citizens. This had led to a bitter taste in everyone's mouth as this was the 2nd major unsuccessful campaign in recent times. 

A section of the public also believes that the US, despite claiming to bring peace and stability to a country, has never won a military campaign. Even the Iraq conflict did not yield any Weapons of Mass Destruction or WMDs. If you add this to the Vietnam fiasco, there has hardly been an all-out victory since World War 2. This is despite many short and long term conflicts that the US has entered uninvited.

Statistics say that the loss of American lives in these conflicts and the financial loss to the American economy has been so big that there is an active campaign afoot to hide those numbers. 

Experts in the field claim that the US has no option but to look for a new "hunting ground" or international conflict that they need to get involved in militarily at the earliest. The gap between Afghanistan and the next issue cannot be too long or they risk endangering some very important things.

Our source in the Pentagon told us that although the potential downside of entering a new conflict is huge, they do not have a way around it.

"We need to find a new geopolitical situation to exploit. It has become an essential factor in the way we operate. These conflicts that we enter is the only way that we can justify the ridiculous amount of money that we spend on our armed forces. The majority of this goes onto producing modern weapons that we use and experiment with in real-life scenarios so that we can sell them to others."

He also explained how the budget allocation would work if there was no conflict and how in reality, these extended "war on terror" operations were profitable to the US, contrary to what the general public thinks.

Unfortunately, we cannot publish that part of the conversation as it was said strictly off the record.

"Fortunately for us, we will be getting into a new war zone quite quickly by mid-2022," he said. The discussions are underway and we should be hearing from the concerned sources in due course of time. We are looking at a minimum 15 year period this time around."

"The Pentagon is where we come to these decisions. What we decided halfway through the Afghan crisis is that these operations were great in many things:

They helped cover up other ways we have fished out money from the economy.
It helped us test new weapons in real-life scenarios.
It provided a showcase to the rest of the world of our weaponry and to attract buyers.
Installing a puppet government who would stand by us on any issue.
Divert the attention of the American public the moment they manage to focus their attention on real issues in the country."

Our source went on to explain how the Afghan operation was made the official reason for the huge amount of debt that the US government has amassed over the years. A write off on that debt was justified as the country was at war during the past 20 odd years.

"The selection process for the new country we will invade is not easy. What we do first is put out an RFP or a Request For Proposal inviting countries to put forward their proposal on what kind of resources that their country has that can be exploited by the US in exchange for the installation of a dummy government and the deployment of forces."

"Then we evaluate the long-term and short-term pros and cons and vet each application thoroughly before we shortlist a couple of them. This process in itself takes at least 6 months to a year and we have some of the best minds in the world working on this."

"This is followed by the easiest...