This study investigates the pragmatics of aggressive discourse in Nigeria–USA relations, employing an interdisciplinary framework that combines Speech Act Theory, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), and Artificial Intelligence (AI)-assisted computational methods. It examines how political communication between both countries functions not only as a medium of information exchange but also as a strategic instrument for negotiating power, asserting national interests, and shaping international perception. The study identifies that aggressive discourse is pragmatically realized through face-threatening acts, assertive and coercive speech acts, metaphorical framing, and evaluative linguistic choices. Findings reveal a contrast in communicative strategies, where Nigeria predominantly adopts indirect, mitigated, and face-saving expressions, while the United States tends toward more direct, explicit, and assertive discourse patterns. These variations are linked to differing ideological orientations, cultural communication norms, and diplomatic strategies. Furthermore, the integration of Artificial Intelligence tools, particularly Natural Language Processing and sentiment analysis, enhances the identification and classification of aggressive discourse patterns across diplomatic texts. This computational approach complements qualitative analysis by enabling systematic, large-scale, and replicable examination of data. The study concludes that aggressive discourse in international relations is systematically structured and strategically deployed to achieve diplomatic objectives. It further demonstrates that the combination of pragmatics, CDA, and AI provides a robust analytical framework for understanding complex diplomatic communication. The study recommends the adoption of AI-assisted discourse monitoring and improved intercultural communication strategies to enhance diplomatic effectiveness and reduce misinterpretation in international relations.