@JLNobody,
Colonial wars such as those between England and France in the 18th century could be considered commercial wars, because the mercantilism they practiced guaranteed the profits of the friends of government. England would always go to war to protect their foreign trade, because it was their economic life blood. Parliament was in the hands, bascially, of two interests--the landed gentry and the mercantile interests. They often found that their interests coincided, and England's paranoia about invasion helped to keep the Royal Navy popular, while that navy was the principle agent by which England projected her power througout the world. Some wars were incredibly stupid things (such as the War of Jenkins' Ear), but support could be whipped up in Parliament because the monied interests would or thought they would profit by going to war with France or Spain. From the late 16th century until 1809, the English were always avid to break into the trade with the Spanish empire, especially in the "New World." "Hearts of Oak" and "England's Jolly Tars" could always be hauled out and dusted off for the public support--not that it mattered much, as those wars had very little effect on the day to day life of anyone in England except the lowest, most friendless classes.
So i can see why people would want to believe that wars were instigated by cabals of private individuals seeking to profit. Theft in office, though, was institutionalized in England by the 18th century, and the Admiralty were scandalously robbed as a matter of course, war or no war. The War of Jenkins' Ear was entirely a political war, from which most members of Parliament or their puppet masters hoped to profit. An English merchant captain named Jenkins and his ship were seized by the Spanish coast guard on the Spanish Main and accused of piracy, for which his ear was cut off. For almost a decade, England demanded an inquiry and compensation, but not very loudly. But the Prime Minister, Walpole, was the target of increasing attacks by the opposition, who alleged that he was in bed with the Spanish. So, in 1739, Walpole and England declared war on Spain--largely to silence Walpole's critics. (It was more than a hundred years later that the war was given the name of the War of Jenkins' Ear.)
In those days, though, there was no military industrial complex. There were any number of unscrupulous contractors who battened on the government to profit from them, but the revolving door about which Eisenhower warned us did not exist then. Individuals exploited situations, and governments were inextricably tied to commercial interests, but it was still government which started the wars. Ironically, it was often canny leadership which exploited the exploiters for their own ends.
King James (of King James Bible fame) had a son (despite almost certainly having been homosexual--getting children was a royal duty), Charles, and Charles had several sons and daughers. Charles got his head cut off at the end of January, 1649, but not before marrying his daughter Mary off to the Prince of Orange. She and the Prince produced a son, William, and he was married off to Mary Stuart, who was the daughter of James Stewart, one of Charlie's sons, and the niece of her new mother-in-law. That sickly boy, William of Orange, fought to preserve Holland from Louis XIV all his life. In 1685, King Charles II died, and his brother, James, became King James II. He was a Catholic, as was his wife, Mary of Modena. (His daughters Mary and Anne were the children of an earlier, Protestant marriage.) In 1688, Mary of Modena gave James a son, and Protestant England panicked. William of Orange and his wife Mary landed in southern England with a Dutch army, and the senior English General, John Churchill, deserted James and went over to William and Mary (yes, the college in Williamsburg, Virginia is named for them). William treated Churchill rather shabbily, and in 1690, he defeated the Catholic army of James in Ireland, which lead to the establishment of the Orange order in Ulster, and the rise of the Orangement there (William was the Prince of Orange, which is in France, and which Louis had already taken away from him--too long an explanation.)
In 1689, William went to war with Louis again, which was the Nine Years War (called King William's War in North America). William was preserving Holland from France, and the English went along because France was Catholic, and James was living there, so it was easy to convince Parliament that it was in their best interest to go to war. By the time that war ended in 1698, Mary was dead and William had no heir. By the settlement of 1688 (the so-called "glorious revolution"), he would be succeeded by his sister-in-law Anne.
Then in 1700, King Carlos II of Spain died. He bequeathed his kingdom to the grandson of Louis XIV, who had married his half-sister. William immediately began putting together an alliance to oppose a Bourbon monarch mounting the Spanish throne. (Holland had been owned by the Spanish until 1648, so the thought of a single King of France
and Spain was the Dutch's worst nightmare.) But William died in 1701, just as the war was beginning. Anne became Queen, and her closest female friend and confidant was the wife of John Churchill, the Earl of Marlborough, so she created John Churchill the Duke of Marlborough, and he continued to put together an alliance to fight Louis.
Marlborough and his friend in Parliament, Sidney Godolphin, now convinced Parliament that England should lead a coalition to prevent Louis' grandson from mounting the Spanish throne. Marlborough went to the continent to lead the Anglo-Dutch army along with their German mercenary allies, and Goldolphin stayed in London and ran the government for Queen Anne. (In North America, the War of the Spanish Succession was called Queen Anne's War.) Parliament went along because they dreamed of trade concessions with Spain once the put their boy on the throne. True to their conservative and stubborn nature, the Spanish decided that if King Carlos had given them to Philip of France, then a Bourbon king they would have. So the English fought to keep a Frenchman off the Spanish throne, and the Spanish fought to put him there.
Not much happened in the way of an effective war in Spain, though certainly thousands died there. The great events of the war took place in Flanders, France, Bavaria and Italy. The "Great Captains" Prince Eugene of Savoy and the Duke of Marlborough fought and won their greatest battles, and the combined might of most of Europe--those who weren't involved in the Great Northern War between Russia, Sweden, Poland (sort of), Saxony and Denmark--finally broke the massive military power of Louis XIV. Louis' grandson still became the King of Spain, and England kind of, sort of got their trade concessions.
Which was why Robert Jenkins' was sailing along the coast of the Spanish Main to get his ear cut off in 1731. Marlborough and Goldolphin were fighting to break the power of Louis XIV, and succeeded despite the dirt thrown at them by the Whigs, who were only fighting to get a foot in the door with the Spanish colonies. So, despite the commercial interests which Goldolphin suckered into backing the war, he and Marlborough succeeded in defeating the French military behemoth which threatened to swallow Europe (except, of course, for Sweden and Russia--but that's a different brand of idiocy that went on there).
History can be made to yield principle causes, but it is always foolish to think that there is any pat cause which applies at all times and in all places.
