The correct answer to this open question is the following.
The historical actions of the United States in response to conflicts around the world have been of rapid intervention when the US economic and political interests were at risk.
For instance, let's set the example of the Cold War years, in which the United States and the Soviet Union competed in the arms race, later in the space race, and the USSR actively tried to spread Communism in different countries of the world, while the United States applied the foreign policy of contention to try to stop the spread of Communism.
These tensions years confronted the US with the USSR in supporting wars such as the Korean War or the Vietnam War.
Then there is the case of the US intervention in the Persian Gulf when Iraq invaded Kuwait in the 1990s. Then the bombarding of Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Or the controversial invasion of Iraq, ordered by George W. Bush, trying to find weapons of mass destruction. The US never found a single WMD there.
Due to all those incidents, a general set of guidelines to help guide Congressional decisions about future interventions in global conflicts would be the following:
-Seize the situation, considering the facts, not only the opinions of the Department of Defense.
-Work hand in hand with the Security Council of the United Nations to confirm the situation.
-Give priority to diplomatic negotiations, trying to reach an agreement. War should be the last resource.
-Search and confirm, through national intelligence, the real motives of a probable invasion. This means to confirm the risk or threat to national security, and completely discard any war action that has ulterior motives that benefit private companies that work in the war industry.
