I don't think you understand the scale of these wars between developed nations. You could kill every single person in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc and it wouldn't even begin to compare to the relative death toll that WW2 inflicted. And to be clear it is not because these countries are not heavily populated. Iraq, for instance, would be about the 7th largest country in Europe, nearly 4 times the size of Sweden for instance.

The loss of life when developed nations fight against each other is literally inconceivable in today's times which is why I went out of my way to try to give measurements that can help you grasp it. The entirety of the world's conflicts today is completely and absolutely negligible compared to WW2. And I'm focusing on WW2. The major point here is the WW3 that we have avoided. The reason for that avoidance is almost entirely because of nuclear weapons.

Finally, it's not just peace for the west. There is unprecedented peace throughout the vast majority of the world. The entirety of Africa and the Mideast account for less than 20% of the world's population.

I did not say the death toll would compare. Im not arguing for or against nukes. Im only saying that the world today has not achieved peace for mankind.

The school my friend went to as a child no longer exists because it was bombed (Syria)

Wars are still happening today, just not with nukes. Every nation with nukes knows that it would be suicide to launch one.

I don't think minority populations are impressed by how wonderfully other populations are dying less?