There must have been much more to the conflict than just the military tactical maneuvers and subsequent domestic responses that were made to the events of the war.
Polybius leaves out much of these details, or maybe he is not aware of the
details or they are not necessary to further his perspective and his goal
in writing his history. He writes that he, "shall, however, attempt to
narrate somewhat more carefully the first war between Rome and Carthage for
the possession of Sicily," meaning his story is just that at its core- a
narration of historical and military events (Polybius 35). Modern
historians delve much farther beneath the surface to find another level to
the conflict, one not rooted in simple cause and effects but as part of a
much bigger picture. Therefore any information as to Rome's expansionist
policies or eventually military growth, and even domestic reasons for
Rome's ascension to a world power would be much appreciated. Similar
information from the Carthaginian side would help as well, as two powers do
not engage in a war simply because of a local conflict or because it is one
power's destiny. There are other forces at work which Polybius does not
recognize or does not want to recognize as they would not further his goals
of the history.
In his histories, Polybius writes about the early days of the
Romans rise to power of the known world. He does so from the perspective
of the victor and this means that to him, Rome's accomplishments are
destined and great and to be celebrated. His perspective on history is a
reflection on this viewpoint. In particular,...

He sees things for what they are, but also he sees things from a Roman
perspective. A modern historian may consider the conflict between two
powers in the same region inevitable, but Polybius recounts the facts as if
they are the only thing that matters. While he is unbiased, there may also
be ulterior motives for his lack of bias. Ultimately, his history is
accurate, but lacking in important details that could have contributed to
the conflict. A modern perspective would look at realistic concerns of
international security, expansion, and political issues. Also, Rome may
have been expanding economically and needed to find new markets or areas
for production. There could have been a wide range of factors leading to a
war between two powers in this zero-sum game on Mediterranean power.
Polybius does not see it this way, however, as he is writing to Greeks
about Rome and for Rome's expansion to be for greed related motives would
reflect bad on the fact that his people were conquered for political or
economic motives. Instead, he portrays the Roman expansion as inevitable
destiny which means that Rome has a right and it is justified that the
former power of Greece is now under Roman influence.

Works Cited
Polybius: the Histories. LacusCurtius. 18 Apr. 2007
.

"Roman History Timeline." UNRV History. 2007. 18 Apr. 2007
.