No, they don't. Unfortunately, politicians don't care about millions of dead, now or then. They'll pretend to in order to lure you into supporting their wars, but that is never their actual motivation for starting a war.

See, this is what I'm talking about. I'm not arguing whether the politicians would have agreed with it, I'm arguing that Patton was right and that taking on the soviets would have been the morally and logically correct thing to do, assuming the basic moral framework that recognizes all the shit that came after as bad.

no killing of millions because of the USSR after 1945

The soviet afghan war caused 7 digit civilian casualties alone. That single proxy war also spawned al-qaeda thanks to the CIA, that single event proves your ignorance, or your lie. That was one of many sources of death from the communist regimes during the cold war era.

And as you admit, the USSR was a murderous police state known for disapppearing their dissidents. They suppressed rebellions and participated in proxy wars. The total death toll attributed to the soviets internally post 1945 is unknown, and they are partially responsible for Korea, Vietnam, and the citizens dead from those regimes and the Cuban regime as well. Without the USSR to support them, it is likely those conflicts would have played out very differently if at all.