Why don't more people in the international community recognize this genocide?

At least 60,000 people have been killed in Pakistan due to terror attacks since the beginning of the war on terror, while the economic losses have been measured at $120 billion. Since 2001, the country has also hosted millions of Afghan refugees who fled the war in Afghanistan.[9][10]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan's_role_in_the_War_on_Terror
We estimate that between March 18, 2003, and June, 2006, an additional 654,965 (392,979–942,636) Iraqis have died above what would have been expected on the basis of the pre-invasion crude mortality rate as a consequence of the coalition invasion. Of these deaths, we estimate that 601,027 (426,369–793,663) were due to violence.[2]

They're not even backed up by telesur in the first place

>directly or indirectly
>indirectly
Enough with this meme. People die “indirectly” from larger scale political actions all the time. It literally doesn’t matter at all.

>stalin cuts off food from various cities for political and geopolitical reasons
>hundreds of thousands die
>lol it doesn't really matter, it was indirect

Attached: pepe stare.jpg (800x450, 40K)

>654,965 (392,979–942,636)
You know that's just one of the studies right?
Credible estimates of Iraq War casualties range from 151,000 violent deaths as of June 2006 (per the Iraq Family Health Survey) to 461,000 total deaths as of June 2011 (per PLOS Medicine 2013), over 60% of them violent.[1] Other disputed estimates, such as the 2006 Lancet study and the 2007 Opinion Research Business (ORB) survey—which likely overestimate mortality—put the numbers as high as 655,000 total deaths as of June 2006 (over 90% of them violent) and 1.2 million violent deaths as of August 2007 respectively. Meanwhile, body counts—which underestimate mortality—put the numbers as low as 110,600 violent deaths as of April 2009

Pakistan?

They took millions of Afghan refugees

>can you post a single reliably study to back that up?
You know that's just one of the studies right?

Attached: dumb.png (1280x1172, 768K)

Turns out millions of refugees, thousands of drone strikes and an unnecessary invasions of random tribal areas at the behest of America can lead to a lot of deaths.

>hundreds of thousands
you mean millions

Maybe you are too dumb to be in internet

Maybe you’re a fucking neocon cock American dick sucking faggot who posts anime girls to describe his sexual desires for huge black cocks while living off of neetbux in your wife’s boyfriend’s basement

>All studies that were conducted vary very heavily in their causalty range
>somehow this makes them reliable

Attached: 1545165461449.jpg (582x595, 26K)

A nationally representative sample of approximately 2,000 Iraqi adults answered whether any members of their household (living under their roof) were killed due to the Iraq War. 22% of the respondents had lost one or more household members. Iraq's population is 40 million so it's 2 million people that report one family member dead

it'd actually be closer to 9 million?

Attached: sad times.png (947x532, 32K)

It was the study

That sounds interesting. Can you post source?
What exactly made this sample nationally representative? 2000 seems like a low number in order to be representative. Where were those samples taken? If they asked people living in fallujah it's be more like to be a positive result than in kut for example.

But we hate America as much as we hate Muzzies.

>iraq 1 million
>afghanistan 220k
>pakistan 80k
>2 million people

Attached: BhTJX7P.jpg (686x414, 73K)

it's almost as if more than just those three countries endured casualties

Attached: iraqi girl.jpg (800x533, 33K)

Invading and occupying a country isn't genocide

yes, but killing civilians is.
That's why hilter invading poland wasn't genocide, but death squads killing polish civilians was genocide.

We didn't systematically kill civilians, we were fighting insurrectionists

(OP)
The infographic says the source is "Nobel Prize-winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War"

Which leads to this report "Body Count: Casualty Figures after 10 Years of the 'War on Terror.'"
ippnw.de/commonFiles/pdfs/Frieden/Body_Count_first_international_edition_2015_final.pdf

The 1 million Iraq, 220,000 Afganistan and 80,000 Pakistan counts are directly from the report.

>This investigation comes to the conclusion that the war has, directly or indirectly,killed around 1 million people in Iraq, 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, i.e. a total of around 1.3 million. Not included in this figure are further war zones such as Yemen. The figure is approximately 10 times greater than that of which the public, experts and decision makers are aware of and propagated by the media and major NGOs.

This is the paragraph were the 2 million seems to come from.

>And this is only a conservative estimate. The total number of deaths in the three countries named above could also be in excess of 2 million, whereas a figure below 1 million is extremely unlikely.

>Literally the RT of Venezuela
Even more based and redpilled

Indirect causalities... oh boy.
That skews everything.

Literally a few days ago an afghan village was droned to kill one terrorist and instead a dozen civilians died. If you claim stupidity for your reason for killing civilians, fine, but it's still in not discriminant and genocide.
bush, obama, and trump will pay for this

how do you point out the civilians from the rebels? You don't.

>in not discriminant and genocide.
indiscriminate and genocide

That source lists ALL the iraqui dead. Not just those killed by the coalition but also for example those killed in the civil war between shias and sunnis that followed the invasion.

that's the same reasoning the einsatzgruppen used

Am I supposed to feel bad or something?

difference being that we try to avoid killing civilians

No, you’re a mongrel edgy teenager with no emotions.

Imagine how much better the world would be if America didn't exist.

Wahhabism would have never grown beyond a fringe movement, spree killers would be extremely rare, consumerism would never have gotten so out of hand, obesity rates would be reasonable, multiculturalism would be fantasy and ambient cringe would be at most 1/3rd of what it is today.

Of course, we would all be living under authoritarian governments but desu they differ from what we have today in name only.

Attached: americanburger_istock_000012108834.jpg (620x465, 61K)

>muh 6 gorrilion!!!!!!!

Attached: 1526020744584.jpg (3720x1866, 1.77M)

It wouldn't be different for India but Europe would be off far worse

Attached: D11C9D03-CEC8-49AF-A1EF-9397830EAC10.jpg (236x180, 18K)

No, I meant the world when I typed world. Literally the entire world would be significantly better without your country.

It's funny that anything that is political and against Russia or China gets deleted but anything that is anti-American is allowed to stay up on Jow Forums.

thats 1,3 million too little

>wahh war not fair war bad
>wahhh US why don't you send more food aid and kill less taliban?!?!?
I'm not a fan of either of those wars but jesus what a deluded COPE

Based jews

based. Should send more drones.

Sorry that I don't care about people who feel they're religiously justified to kill and subjugate me for not being a mudslime

Obviously not trying very hard

nytimes.com/2019/03/10/world/asia/airstrikes-nangarhar-afghanistan.html