Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Breaks rule 1Reporter, the first rule of Lemmy is you don’t make false reports against site admins’ posts.
Isn’t that just the list of wars involving the United States
About 350 thousand according to this source whe you can find a list and a very conservative death count: https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202307/10/WS64ab6988a310bf8a75d6e3a2.html
The most deadly NATO intervention is the Iraq war, in October 2006 the Lancet estimated the following:
Three misattributed clusters were excluded from the final analysis; data from 1849 households that contained 12 801 individuals in 47 clusters was gathered. 1474 births and 629 deaths were reported during the observation period. Pre-invasion mortality rates were 5·5 per 1000 people per year (95% CI 4·3–7·1), compared with 13·3 per 1000 people per year (10·9–16·1) in the 40 months post-invasion. We estimate that as of July, 2006, there have been 654 965 (392 979–942 636) excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war, which corresponds to 2·5% of the population in the study area. Of post-invasion deaths, 601 027 (426 369–793 663) were due to violence, the most common cause being gunfire
https://web.archive.org/web/20150907130701/http://brusselstribunal.org/pdf/lancet111006.pdf
This is not what you asked, but the only resource that immediate comes to mind is countercurrents’ list of every invasion the US has carried out compiled in 2013: https://www.countercurrents.org/polya050713.htm
I’m not sure if anyone’s compiled what you’re asking for. Of course the death toll of the US directly both contains events that pre-date NATO, and NATO contains countries other than the US.
That is a way too broad range of variables to calculate properly. Include specifications.
That’s nearly impossible to answer:
- Are only NATO operations included?
- How would combined operations be counted (Afghanistan was under a wider UN umbrella)?
- What’s even the civilian definition?
This can just be a provocative question to present NATO negatively.
NATO is bad, though. It’s the “defensive” alliance for the world’s imperialist powers, similar to how “Israel” “defends itself” with the IDF. It’s used to prevent the people of the global south from directly retaliating against imperialism.
This can just be a provocative question to present NATO negatively.
I agree. However, these days NATO does not need anyone but themselves to put it into negatively daylight.
With US in NATO and allowing Israel to do what they do meanwhile other NATO countries are just watching from sidelines. I know this is a very simplified version but yeah.
That said… I’m not fond of any countries government.
Do you mean NATO (defense operations if one member is attacked)? Wars started by a NATO member? Unofficial proxy war support?
The answer is actually “a mix of all three,” and it really depends on which conflict you’re looking at.
For Afghanistan, it was exactly the first one: the only time Article 5, the “attack on one is an attack on all” clause, has ever been invoked. That happened after 9/11 and led directly to the NATO-led mission there.
Yugoslavia in 1999 was a different beast entirely; that was NATO waging an air campaign without a UN Security Council mandate, operating far outside its traditional defensive boundaries to stop ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.
When you look at Iraq in 2003, NATO as an organization sat it out, but the war was obviously started by key NATO members like the US and UK, and the alliance itself only stepped in later to help train Iraqi security forces.
Finally, the 2011 Libya intervention was more of a formal NATO operation, but it fits the mold of an unofficial proxy war of sorts, as the alliance used a UN mandate to protect civilians as the basis for a bombing campaign that ultimately helped rebels overthrow Gaddafi
