(I'm assuming, of course, that the GP is largely talking about "wars I disagree with" when referring to "actively and openly stealing other countries' resources," because the number of recent conflicts that are openly about resource control is very small and the US is involved with none of them. The Iraq War is often claimed to be about oil grab, but that doesn't really make any sense when you dig into the history of the buildup to the war, and in any case, it certainly wasn't "openly" about it.)
A _tiny_ difference between those and United States of America is that USA crosses entire oceans to steal resources, where other invasions you mentioned are bordering countries; exception to that is obviously the Malvinas Island occupation by the British Empire - talking of which:
> Argentinian invasion of the Falklands Do you also consider Angola to be rightful Portuguese soil?
The only US wars that are strongly arguably stealing resources would be the various banana wars (but the Gulf of Mexico isn't exactly an ocean), the Spanish-American War (ditto; note that the US never set out on the war to conquer the Philippines, the US Navy just happened to be in the area at the time), and the Indian Wars.
I guess they just happened to be there because of the nice weather.
There was a British colony on the Falklands before Argentina even existed as a country. It was unnamed and unoccupied by anyone.
As far as I can read Las Malvinas were occupied by spanish and british forces, then the brits volountarily abandoned the place[0]
[0](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-FOO...)