Pacifists?

America exalts its military. And, in their private moments, neocons excoriate conservatives for their pacificism. They say that Americans are more realistic and know how to handle things like war.
Is that so? An article by Tony Judt in the New York Review of Books makes a convincing argument that it is because Americans do not have enough experience that they are so gung-ho.
In world war I, America lost 140,000 soldiers, France 1.4m, Germany 2m. In WWII, America lost 400,000 troops. Russia 10.7m. Poland lost 5.5m civilians, Germany 4m. The USA 2,000. The only other unambiguous victor of the war was Britain -but she was bankrupted and lost her empire. America had a "good war".
It is the only major nation, where apart from those who fought in WWII, there is no collective memory of wa, and thus the only advanced democracy where war is glorified, a sentiment unknown in Europe. American politicians surround themselves with the trappings of military prowess, and commentators do not hesitate to swoopdown on allies ambivalent about engaging in armed conflict.
It is the contrasting recollection of war and its impact rather than any structural difference between countries which accounts for differences between otherwise similar countries.
Most neoconservatives complacently claim that war and conflict are things only Americans understand - in contrast to naive Europeans with their pacificistic fantasies. This is completely wrong. It is Europeans who understand war; Americans who live in blissful ignorance.