No actual historical data is out there on frequency because war is not triggered by time, its triggered by either "not enough" usually resources, or threat to power, usually existing. 2nd world war, rise of fascism. Iraq 2, threat to oil revenue via currency change to euro, Afganistan, first threat to usa superpower since japan. Various old Chinese wars, land grabs (resources). Interestingly Seria were left untouched because politically there was a perceived better gain by blaming Libia instead, to Gadaffis misfortune.

Iraq 2, I remember Tony Blair saying, "we have a dossier showing Iraq can launch an attack in 45 minutes" as his justification for war and we went to war on this basis. We all thought that was a terrible threat, until it turned out the dossier was written for the Iraq 1 war, and was produced by a student at university. Such is the madness.

War is cold, calculated and will not be undertaken unless there is a land mass gain, or a power gain (or its negative, elimination of threat to existing power).

I’m pretty sure Pinker had some data on this in The Better Angels of our Nature. However, he also brought up a lot of issues with the data on wars and violence, and how different historians make different distinctions between wars, skirmishes, isolated acts of terror, etc. But I would start with whatever data he provided in the book.

Thanks.

Just the bona fide wars of Europe since the 11th century...indicates that war is a frequent enough condition to be considered ongoing.

Is your question merely a way of indicting the media as sensationalists?

That can be done without the "how much war" element...especially in a capitalistic society. The media wants to sell newspapers and attract viewers. Sensationalism does that job much better than ho-hum.

Fair enough, assuming you aren't stating that war is always "ongoing" even when no "official" war has been declared or made known (e.x. the 90s Bosnia conflict, "cyberwarfare", etc).

How often would you say that a war or conflict considered big or significant enough to be considered a "major" war on our historical time occurs?

(e.x. the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the US Civil War, WWI, WWII, First Gulf War, Second Gulf War, etc etc).

With those conditions...probably not too often.

But some of the wars of less expanse have killed LOTS of people...and the people killed (or displaced) are unlikely to make such a distinction. The Russian, French, and Spanish Civil Wars were pretty bad...and exacted huge tolls. The war in Syria, wars between Irish and Irish or Irish and English, the Korean War, the War in Afghanistan, the Boer War, The Zulu Wars...and such.

Our need to kill one another is not endless, by any means...but it is far from minor.

Countries going to war doesn't happen in any sequence, so it's rather uninformative to count an average to wars. Nations vary in their age and let's say a Great Power being entangled in an colonial war is something totally different... than the nation or area to be colonized. You really don't see the War in Afghanistan on the streets of New York, but you do see it in Kabul.

And then there is the question how you define a war. If a country sends a 30-man medical team to a joint-operation, does that mean that the country is in war? Or does the enemy have to bomb the country and there be martial law and universal conscription?