If you give me an example..
Well, let's just say there were some people in some European countries which needed America's help against an enemy they couldn't defeat by themselves. It would have been in their vital national interests to try to convince Americans to support getting into the war on their side. I don't think Americans really wanted to interfere in Europe, but it was the Europeans who goaded us into it.
The reality was that the British and French obviously wanted to maintain their own empires and saw Germany as an upstart and a threat against that. And it may not have been an unfounded fear, since they obviously had trouble in defeating Germany. Think of it: The mighty and powerful great empires of France and Britain, with all their lands and resources and manpower combined - could not do better than a stalemate against a much smaller and resource-poor nation like Germany. Go figure. And that's even with Germany also winning handily in Russia.
For the most part, once America and Britain settled their early differences, our interests started to become more aligned with each other. They had the world's most powerful navy, and as long as the sea lanes were kept open and safe, we could freely trade with Europe or any other part of the world. In terms of foreign policy aspirations, freedom of the seas is all America ever really wanted.
During the 19th century, it appeared Britain had enough strength and diplomatic savvy to be able to influence European affairs in such a way as to be able to maintain a balance of power. This involved trying to contain countries like Russia and Germany which also had imperialistic and expansionist aspirations. They probably could have kept on doing it, except for one small problem: Germany just became too dang powerful and too much for them to handle on their own.
I can understand.
An example after 1775, the birth of the country.
Well, let me ask you this, since you've brought up names like Kissinger and Soros in the past. Were those men born in America or Europe? (We already know the answer.)
After the last world war.
It already exists.
A single world government under the banking élites.
Not likely in a world with 195 sovereign countries:
How many countries are there in the world? (2024) - Total & List | Worldometer.
Of course, having all these different countries also creates a number of places to hide.
With a truly single world government, there would be no place to hide. All territory in the world would be under a single government. No one would be able to hide their money in offshore accounts, since it would be part of the same country. Having all these different countries provides effective cover for malfeasance which would be removed if a single world government were established. That's how we know that a single world government actually doesn't exist. What seems more evident is that rival factions are competing with each other for control, and the competition hasn't been very friendly lately.