Those weren't build from the goodness of somebodies heart, but because the CIA realised that they can't win a war against combatants which they themselves created a constant supply of by blowing up their loved ones.
Also, nobody ever argued that they are exactly the same, but both should be dragged in front of the Hague nevertheless. It matters little to the dead, injured, and loved ones, wether it happened to terrorise (as Russia does in Ukraine, or the US did in latin America and Iran) or because of apathy towards dehumanised people (as with the USA, UK, Germany, e.t.c. in Iraq and Afghanistan).
Bay of Pigs, Iranian Contras, School of the Americas .. the 1973 coupé in Chile alone killed 11,000. I'm pretty sure the US/CIA has killed way more civilians than Iraq could even hope to claim under Saddam. That list is no justification for invasion and war.
First, deaths and genocide are different things. The CCP’s killing between 20 and 43 million people from 1959–1961 was incompetence not a genocide. Numbers of deaths are irrelevant the intent must be the systematic destruction of a people.
So sure the Iraq war combined combined with a sectarian civil war, and after effects from the breakdown of the economy and social order possibly reached a few hundred thousand deaths. But that’s by definition not a genocide. If you want an American genocide look back to what happened to Native Americans.
On the other hand CIA handled instigators killed far in excess of 45,000 people during the 'cold' war.
reply