> mass killing at an unprecedented level There've been many wars that came a lot closer to WWII in terms of casualties than the Second Congo War did. Look at t

> mass killing at an unprecedented level There've been many wars that came a lot closer to WWII in terms of casualties than the Second Congo War did. Look at that wikipedia page I linked to in my previous comment. - Three Kingdoms War: 184-280, 36,000,000–40,000,000 casualties. - Mongol conquests: 1206–1368, 30,000,000–40,000,000 casualties. - An Lushan Rebellion: 755–763, 13,000,000–36,000,000 casualties. - Conquests of Timur: 1370–1405, 8,000,000–20,000,000 casualties. - Taiping Rebellion: 1850–1864, 20,000,000–30,000,000 casualties. - Dungan Revolt: 1862–1877, 8,000,000–20,000,000 casualties. As you can see, what's mainly special about WW1/2 is the casualties/year ratio. The total death tolls are not that unprecedented. It's indeed silly to say that there's been global peace since WW2, but I do believe that there is a difference between the wars we've seen in the last 75 years, and the wars I listed above. I'd still call the Second Congo War a major war, but I do think there's a distinction to be made here. The word "major" just isn't it, and I think we both agree on that.