Why did Oswald kill JFK?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I believe we explain it quite easily by my post above. His infatuation with the "real Marxism" of Castro and his hope to finally achieve his destiny in Cuba were genuine. The failure of his trip to MC, the collapse of his marriage, and his dead-end job at the TSBD left him in near-desperation. Then Fate seemed to hand him a golden opportunity in the form of JFK's motorcade route. He went to Ruth Paine's on Thursday as a last-ditch effort at reconciliation with Marina. When she rebuffed him, this confirmed that Fate was indeed speaking and his destiny was confirmed. He carried out a near spur-of-the-moment assassination with an unlikely weapon that just happened to be highly successful. I see no reason to make things more complicated than this.

Okay, but that still doesn't add up to me (I'm going in circles here admittedly). If he was driven by his deep hatred of America, his support for Castro and his view that JFK was an enemy of "the revolution", then why wait until the last day to strike back? All of those reasons are deep, substantive, long-standing. The idea that all of them would disappear if Marina had simply agreed to find an apartment and move back together simply doesn't make sense to me. No pasaran, comrades! Unless Marina moves in with me? Some revolutionary he is. And contrast this planning, or lack of it, versus the planning in the Walker attempt. It doesn't add up to me but that may be just my problem.

Just one on MC: He told Marina after returning that he had given up on Castro, that his treatment by the Cuban bureaucrats was just like the Soviet system. Both systems, for him, failed to meet his vision of a true Marxist society and not worth defending. Now, he may have been lying; I think he was. I find it hard to believe that his long time support for Castro ended because some bureaucrats failed to give him his transit visa. That failure means the entire system, "the Revolution", was a lie?  No, there's something in MC that, I think, is involved in his act.

[Richard Smith]

Okay, but that still doesn't add up to me (I'm going in circles here admittedly). If he was driven by his deep hatred of America, his support for Castro and his view that JFK was an enemy of "the revolution", then why wait until the last day to strike back? All of those reasons are deep, substantive, long-standing. The idea that all of them would disappear if Marina had simply agreed to find an apartment and move back together simply doesn't make sense to me. No pasaran, comrades! Unless Marina moves in with me? Some revolutionary he is. And contrast this planning, or lack of it, versus the planning in the Walker attempt. It doesn't add up to me but that may be just my problem.

Just one on MC: He told Marina after returning that he had given up on Castro, that his treatment by the Cuban bureaucrats was just like the Soviet system. Both systems, for him, failed to meet his vision of a true Marxist society and not worth defending. Now, he may have been lying; I think he was. I find it hard to believe that his long time support for Castro ended because some bureaucrats failed to give him his transit visa. That failure means the entire system, "the Revolution", was a lie?  No, there's something in MC that, I think, is involved in his act.

Oswald had already crossed the Rubicon with the Walker attempt.  He was ready and willing to kill a public figure for political reasons.  Not many people fall into that bucket.  Fate simply dealt him JFK.  Oswald was a malcontent with a chip on his shoulder.  Willing to commit political murder with his rifle.  One day he finds out JFK, as the representative of the society that he detests, is going to drive right by his building.  That must have been like finding the golden ticket to him.  No bigger statement than to assassinate the president in broad daylight riding through a US city.

Oswald was actively trying to send Marina back to Russia while he made efforts to get to Cuba.  So I don't think his marital status played much of a role in his decision.  The lack of planning in the JFK situation was a function of the timeline.  Oswald doesn't find out until Tuesday that JFK is coming to town.  He has plenty of time to assess the steps to be taken.  My guess on Mexico City is that Oswald might have told the Cubans that he had or was willing to commit a violent act on behalf of the cause to impress them with his dedication.  Did he tell them about the Walker attempt?  Maybe but probably not.  He more likely implied something along those lines but without specifying.  If he kills the president and makes it back to the Cuban embassy, maybe he thinks he will be welcomed as a hero.  The Cubans think he is a nut or CIA plant when he comes to MC.  They take his story with a grain of salt.  After the JFK assassination, they still think that maybe Oswald was sent to them as a pretext for an invasion (i.e. they had foreknowledge that Oswald had or would commit some assassination).  As a result, they never mention it. Killing the president is not a rational act.  There is no neat and tidy explanation to answer every question.  It's doubtful even Oswald could explain it in a way that makes any sense. 

[Bill Brown]

Oswald's motive for shooting at General Walker was the same as he had for assassinating the President.  Marxism and Cuba.  Oswald wanted the United States Government to keep it's hands off of Cuba.

Oswald told Capt. Will Fritz that he was a Marxist, that he belonged to the Fair Play For Cuba organization and that he was in favor of Fidel Castro's revolution.

Before the revolution, Castro, with his Marxist beliefs, condemned social and economic inequality in Cuba.  He adopted the Marxist view that meaningful political change could only be brought about by proletariat revolution.

While Castro was imprisoned for the failed attack on the Moncada Barracks in Cuba, his wife took employment with the Ministry of the Interior.  Castro was enraged and insulted.  His Marxist beliefs were so strong that filed for divorce.  Mirta (Castro's wife) took custody of their son Fidelito.  The thought of his son growing up in a bourgeois environment further enraged Castro.

Oswald agreed strongly with the Marxist beliefs of Castro.

During the revolution, the U.S. Government feared that Castro was a socialist.

In early January of 1959, Batista was overthrown by the rebels and he fled.

The revolution was a crucial turning point in relations between the U.S. and Cuba.  Originally, the U.S. government was willing to recognize Castro's new government.  However, the U.S. government would eventually fear that Communist insurgencies would spread through Latin America, as they had in Southeast Asia.

On March 5, 1963, Major General Edwin Walker gave a speech where he called on the White House to "liquidate the (communist) scourge that has descended upon the island of Cuba."  Walker was obviously referring to Fidel Castro.   Oswald ordered his rifle seven days later.

Captain Fritz told the Warren Commission:

"I got the impression that he was doing it because of his feeling about the Castro revolution, and I think that he felt, he had a lot of feeling about that revolution.

I think that was the reason. I noticed another thing. I noticed a little before when Walker was shot, he had come out with some statements about Castro and about Cuba and a lot of things and if you will remember the President had some stories a few weeks before his death about Cuba and about Castro and some things, and I wondered if that didn't have some bearing.

I have no way of knowing that other than just watching him and talking to him. I think it was his feeling about his belief in being a Marxist, he told me he had debated in New Orleans, and that he tried to get converts to this Fair Play for Cuba organization, so I think that was his motive. I think he was doing it because of that."

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Oswald's motive for shooting at General Walker was the same as he had for assassinating the President.  Marxism and Cuba.  Oswald wanted the United States Government to keep it's hands off of Cuba.

Oswald told Capt. Will Fritz that he was a Marxist, that he belonged to the Fair Play For Cuba organization and that he was in favor of Fidel Castro's revolution.

Before the revolution, Castro, with his Marxist beliefs, condemned social and economic inequality in Cuba.  He adopted the Marxist view that meaningful political change could only be brought about by proletariat revolution.

While Castro was imprisoned for the failed attack on the Moncada Barracks in Cuba, his wife took employment with the Ministry of the Interior.  Castro was enraged and insulted.  His Marxist beliefs were so strong that filed for divorce.  Mirta (Castro's wife) took custody of their son Fidelito.  The thought of his son growing up in a bourgeois environment further enraged Castro.

Oswald agreed strongly with the Marxist beliefs of Castro.

During the revolution, the U.S. Government feared that Castro was a socialist.

In early January of 1959, Batista was overthrown by the rebels and he fled.

The revolution was a crucial turning point in relations between the U.S. and Cuba.  Originally, the U.S. government was willing to recognize Castro's new government.  However, the U.S. government would eventually fear that Communist insurgencies would spread through Latin America, as they had in Southeast Asia.

On March 5, 1963, Major General Edwin Walker gave a speech where he called on the White House to "liquidate the (communist) scourge that has descended upon the island of Cuba."  Walker was obviously referring to Fidel Castro.   Oswald ordered his rifle seven days later.

Captain Fritz told the Warren Commission:

"I got the impression that he was doing it because of his feeling about the Castro revolution, and I think that he felt, he had a lot of feeling about that revolution.

I think that was the reason. I noticed another thing. I noticed a little before when Walker was shot, he had come out with some statements about Castro and about Cuba and a lot of things and if you will remember the President had some stories a few weeks before his death about Cuba and about Castro and some things, and I wondered if that didn't have some bearing.

I have no way of knowing that other than just watching him and talking to him. I think it was his feeling about his belief in being a Marxist, he told me he had debated in New Orleans, and that he tried to get converts to this Fair Play for Cuba organization, so I think that was his motive. I think he was doing it because of that."

It's difficult to ignore Oswald's life long support for "The Revolution", his deep repeated devotion to Castro (Marina said he used to sings songs to "Fidel" and that he wanted to name their first child after him) from his act, from any "Why" answer. The assassination was a political act and I don't think Oswald suddenly became apolitical on November 22, 1963.

Remember that five days before the assassination in an address widely reported (it was in the Dallas papers) that JFK essentially called for the removal of the Castro government. He said this:

"It is important to restate what now divides Cuba from my country and from the other countries of this hemisphere. It is the fact that a small band of conspirators has stripped the Cuban people of their freedom and handed over the independence and sovereignty of the Cuban nation to forces beyond the hemisphere. They have made Cuba a victim of foreign imperialism, an instrument of the policy of others, a weapon in an effort dictated by external powers to subvert the other American Republics. This, and this alone, divides us. As long as this is true, nothing is possible. Without it, everything is possible. Once this barrier is removed, we will be ready and anxious to work with the Cuban people in pursuit of those progressive goals which a few short years ago stirred their hopes and the sympathy of many people throughout the hemisphere."

"Once this barrier is removed"? What else can that be but a call for the removal of Castro? And the "barrier" that needed removal was the "small band of conspirators" who took over the country. That's the Castros and Che et al. I don't think Oswald, let's say, liked hearing call from JFK. The radical publications that Oswald read were filled with stories about the attacks on Cuba. Oswald knew what JFK was doing to "The Revolution." For Oswald, there was no difference between a fascist like Walker and a liberal democrat like JFK. They were both, in different ways of course, enemies of his cause (in fact, Oswald wrote that there was no difference between Christian democrats and conservatives and monarchists and others versus Marxists; you were either one or the other).

Or this was all done by the "deep state" and it's been covered up by multiple generations of Americans in government and outside it for 60 years. People like Seymour Hersh and Tim Weiner, Earl Warren and Robert Blakey, Frank Church, the NY Times and Washington Post, Walter Cronkite and Peter Jennings, Robert Caro and well, my fingers are getting tired. If you believe the latter then good lord, don't get out of the bed in the morning. "They" are going to get you.

[Lance Payette]

Okay, but that still doesn't add up to me (I'm going in circles here admittedly). If he was driven by his deep hatred of America, his support for Castro and his view that JFK was an enemy of "the revolution", then why wait until the last day to strike back? All of those reasons are deep, substantive, long-standing. The idea that all of them would disappear if Marina had simply agreed to find an apartment and move back together simply doesn't make sense to me. No pasaran, comrades! Unless Marina moves in with me? Some revolutionary he is. And contrast this planning, or lack of it, versus the planning in the Walker attempt. It doesn't add up to me but that may be just my problem.

Just one on MC: He told Marina after returning that he had given up on Castro, that his treatment by the Cuban bureaucrats was just like the Soviet system. Both systems, for him, failed to meet his vision of a true Marxist society and not worth defending. Now, he may have been lying; I think he was. I find it hard to believe that his long time support for Castro ended because some bureaucrats failed to give him his transit visa. That failure means the entire system, "the Revolution", was a lie?  No, there's something in MC that, I think, is involved in his act.

I understand your point, and it's a legitimate one. I don't believe the assassination can be explained purely in terms of Marxism. I believe that was a secondary factor in the assassination - basically Oswald's way of justifying to himself what he was doing. But I believe the primary cause was that he had psychologically cracked - reached the point where reality had set in and life was no longer worth living. That is what I, at least, believe was happening - basically an attempt at "suicide by cop" with the Marxist/Cuba angle as a psychological justification for it being something more heroic than a suicide. When he found himself outside the TSBD, I believe he was astounded and a whole new narrative began to form. Now he realized he could extend the Marxist theater for perhaps years and become an actual Marxist hero in history.

As you seem to recognize, nothing about the assassination suggests any sort of careful planning or preparation.  It seems to me very much of a spur-of-the-moment, what the hell, my life is over anyway, I'll go out with a bang sort of event. This to me cuts decisively against any serious conspiracy; no conspirators this side of the Three Stooges would have allowed the events of Thursday and Friday to occur as they did. It's certainly possible that some half-assed discussions technically qualifying as a conspiracy may have occurred in MC.

[Jim Hawthorn]

That's obvious.  Oswald didn't know that he was going to be killed within 48 hours of the assassination.  He thought he had months or even years to play this game and bargain his confession to avoid the death penalty.  Admitting his guilt was the one card he still had to play in the legal context.  It is also consistent with his malcontent personality.  Oswald was a pathological liar during his life.  He probably got a kick out of making the police "figure it out."  He wasn't going to help them.  Oswald wanted historical credit for the assassination, but he wasn't going to help the police send him to the electric chair.  He knew he had assassinated the president.  That alone made him a person of significance whether he confessed or not.   He also knew that the police had the evidence to link him to the crime.  So he could milk this for attention.  Play the victim. Once he confessed, he would be thrown in a cage and no longer be of as much interest.  Had Oswald lived, he likely would have gone the James Earl Ray direction of trading his confession to avoid the death penalty and then spending the rest of his life suggesting there was something more to the story to con gullible conspiracy theorists into paying attention to him.

Nope. Not even a nice try. You're really trying (in vain) to stretch your argument to fit your assumption. You are putting yourself inside Oswald's head, assuming his thoughts. Wow, impressive (but you are only impressing yourself with that hogwash).

[Lance Payette]

Nope. Not even a nice try. You're really trying (in vain) to stretch your argument to fit your assumption. You are putting yourself inside Oswald's head, assuming his thoughts. Wow, impressive (but you are only impressing yourself with that hogwash).

EVERY attempt to explain the JFKA requires putting oneself inside Oswald's head. There is no escaping this reality. The events from Thursday to Sunday don't fit tidily into any narrative. The tidiest of them, I believe, does involve a major shift in Oswald's thinking when he surprisingly found himself alive after the assassination. The "theater" of the FPCC episode in New Orleans is a good indication that he was perfectly capable of thinking in "theatrical" terms. It makes entire sense that after the assassination he would have realized "Fate has handed me yet another golden opportunity. I'm going to connect with John Abt, be the central figure in the trial of the century, and enter into history as a major Marxist hero." The problem with elaborate conspiracy theories is that they require being inside the head of someone who bears little or no resemblance to the actual Oswald.

[Jim Hawthorn]

EVERY attempt to explain the JFKA requires putting oneself inside Oswald's head. There is no escaping this reality. The events from Thursday to Sunday don't fit tidily into any narrative. The tidiest of them, I believe, does involve a major shift in Oswald's thinking when he surprisingly found himself alive after the assassination. The "theater" of the FPCC episode in New Orleans is a good indication that he was perfectly capable of thinking in "theatrical" terms. It makes entire sense that after the assassination he would have realized "Fate has handed me yet another golden opportunity. I'm going to connect with John Abt, be the central figure in the trial of the century, and enter into history as a major Marxist hero." The problem with elaborate conspiracy theories is that they require being inside the head of someone who bears little or no resemblance to the actual Oswald.

Like Richard, you're trying to think like Oswald in order to validate your theory. You also seem to be incorrectly assuming that a conspiracy has to be "elaborate". Have you considered to possibility that nobody with "the government" was involved? That it wasn't an "inside job"?
If I observe Oswald's behaviour (without trying to say what he's actually thinking), he look perplexed, confused. Rather than looking like he has triumphed by getting back at others, "sticking a finger up", he looks stunned - denying that he shot anyone and shouting "I'm the patsy!!". Then comes the hopeless LNer argument: "he was nuts".