Wars like WWII ended the depression because the propaganda and demand from the war increased production, giving people more federal, facility, marketing jobs, etc. It doesn't matter what job people have, a good economy mainly consist with the demand of consumers balancing with a good amount of jobs.
There's no economic gain from the current wars/conflicts, because they are not high demanding, especially since a lot of people have morale against them. A nation wouldn't be downsizing from a war unless its a complete lost cause. Say as in they're losing it, losing by military force or losing support in their own country.
Demand from the war increased production of tanks, bombs, guns, etc. These aren't things that are increasing standard of living for the people. They might increase GDP, but this is just a reflection of how GDP is an imperfect measure of how good an economy is. What matters is producing things that will increase people's standard of living.
The resources that are consumed in war (labor, capital, natural resources) could have gone towards making something that people want, something that will increase standard of living.
If it "doesn't matter what job people have", then do you support giving all unemployed people jobs digging holes and filling them in? This will increase their demand, right? But it will actually hurt the economy for two reasons. The first is that those people will not be able to get actual productive jobs. The second is that the money to pay them has to come from somewhere - and that somewhere must be the private sector, harming the people that are producing things consumers actually desire.
A good economy does not mainly consist of the demand of consumers. It mainly consists of the supply of goods that fill that demand. Remember, demand is basically unlimited. I want a personal assistant, a rocket ship, and a new computer. But there needs to be supply to fill those demands. Paying people to make tanks, bombs, and guns or to dig holes and fill them up is not supplying anything people want.
edit:
ummm. i pretty sure WWII was the best thing that ever happened to america economically since they started growing tobacco. lrn2knowyourownhistory.
the propaganda wasn't significant economically, however it might have contributed to the huge spike in female workers which was hugely important. and the jobs types arent too important, the more cash moves the better for the economy, problems occur when money ISNT moving.
and there is huge gain in current conflicts,
look at Zimbabwe and the new diamond fields, or even the whole of africa.
America depends on the middle east for oil. whats happening in the middle east right now...oh yeah that.
probably the most significant wars which werent great for the american economy in the 20th century were the vietnam and korean war.
i suggest you read modern money mechanics, and get a basic understanding of american/world economic history before you make comments like ballin4life's
Basically you have no idea what you're talking about. How about addressing what I say instead of asserting your conclusion repeatedly. At least WOTG tries to make an argument.
