[flagged]
Aside from the fact that complete worldwide peace has yet to happen, it is also worth mentioning that this period also coincided with nuclear proliferation. If Iraq had nuclear ICBMs they would not have been invaded.
Many have said that the US military adventurism and support for 3rd world despots has made the world a more dangerous place. I think there's plenty of room to debate such ideas instead of discarding such dialogue so rashly.
Now? The contingent of countries between whom war is unthinkable is growing every year. Amazing. Many empires have achieved similar results regionally, but America is the first to have done so worldwide with the actual ability to enforce it. Amazing
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/peaceful-and-hostile-rela...
The USA has been involved with many conflicts and supported bloody dictators around the world, including:
- Wars with Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Grenada, Libya, and more
- Supporting corrupt regimes including such gems Pinochet, Hussein, Bin Laden, Gaddafi among MANY others
- Supported destabilizing coups and (counter) revolutions, often with significant blowback (Iran, 911, etc)
Overall the post-WWII context was better than the eras that preceded it. This occasionally came with a very high cost to (mostly) innocent people in far away lands. The US did not 'force peace' upon the world, it pursued its interests, and humanitarian outcome was little more than an afterthought. The death toll in Vietnam and Iraq alone show this rather directly.