Putting it another way:
Most of the far parts of either of the left/right spectrum embrace a world view they are welded to which is not strictly rational. The world view has a lot to do with who decides what goes on and how the world can then be set 'right' (their version of right conforming to their ideology). Trade won't get you there. Covert and overt actions might. Invasion is one. Assassination, manipulation, hacking, election smears, election tampering, the list goes on. Good old fashioned insurgencies fit in there too.
I don't think JFK tried to invade Cuba just to collect vintage 1950s American Car parts... there was ideology (less to do directly with Cuba and more to do with the overall global domino game that the US was playing with the Russians). And that wasn't even a competently staged invasion.
Hitler's ideology involved putting the Aryan on top of the world, because that's how it was meant to be. It was just a nice bonus (ya as if) that it meant he would be running the show. It would let the Aryans to form the Thousand Year Reich. Sure, just like every such right wing or left wing aggression, it had some pragmatic gains to be made (oil fields, factories, farming lands, stolen antiquities and works of art, potential recruiting ground - even some Norwegians fought for the Germans). Just like every religious war, it was a mix of ideology and acquisition of land, wealth, or power (which are different currencies of the same thing). The % of ideological motivation vs. pragmatic varies by the conflict (and I'm sure every senior leader has their own balance of what they want out of it). Sometimes it comes down to xenophobia and hate. Other times, it is just global realpolitik (Mr. Putin and the Russians have been good at that) and other times it is about a long-term plan for greatness and hegemony without an outright invasion (except of annoying neighbours and that only after a local population has been created that can be 'rescued' by the invasion) (Chinese strategy).
Few wars are entirely logically conceived of anymore. Nor are they strictly about wealth/power/land. It's always a mix.
And to go to war, which the leaders may wish, they need to motivate the populace (whip up the fear and hate or sense of injustice).
In Traveller terms, that boils down to it being possible to invade somewhere (another world or another nation on a balkanized world) for reasons that defy trading logic. That can happen with either conception of trade (small, large, or something in between since it isn't a binary choice here either).