Not to minimize the destruction that Soviet Union (and much of Eastern Europe) had experienced, but Kennedy was not that much of a stranger of the horrors of wa

Not to minimize the destruction that Soviet Union (and much of Eastern Europe) had experienced, but Kennedy was not that much of a stranger of the horrors of war. In addition to whatever he saw on the Pacific front (which, if you'll recall, might have included some of the most horrendous atrocities of the war), his elder brother was killed during the war, too -- just like Khruschev lost his son during the war. IIRC, it's a fact that Khruschev himself reminded him of, during their private talks in Viena: they both knew, on a personal level, the kind of toll that war levies. The "burden" (Kennedy's words, not mine) of avoiding similar destruction was something that he carried every step of the way during the Berlin crisis and then, later, during the missile crisis. Both Kennedy and Khruschev, and others in their immediate circle, had this "more than academic" understanding of the tragedy of war. (edit: FWIW, my native country was no stranger to destruction in Europe. My grand-grandfather lost a brother and several friends at Stalingrad. I'm not some patriotic 'murican trying to save face for his president :-). I do think that losing a brother qualifies as having a pretty practical understanding of what war means.)