Well, as I noted, we are most unlikely ever to get "the truth" (or at least a "truth" that will satisfy everyone).
What I find most interesting is speculating on how this country would look today, had JFK not been murdered.
Would he have been defeated in 1964?
Would Vietnam have unfolded as badly as it did?
Would Nixon have been elected, run an incompetent and downright crooked Administration and discredited the Republican Party for years to come? (Oh wait, he was and he did).
How would the Cold War have turned out?
Are there historical forces that move us along, or is history determined by the actions of a few key individuals?
Or both?
I could probably write a novel based on any one of these questions- and the dozens of others hat occur to me, or to anyone who thinks about the last 40 years of American history.
The assassination was a major turning point, and speculation about it will continue as long as there is a United States.
Certainly, as you suggest, we may never get the "whole truth" - whatever that may mean. But that's not necessarily what we're looking for. I definitely think it's within the realm of possibility - or within a reasonable doubt - to know if Oswald shot Kennedy and whether or not he acted alone. That's all.
I've looked closely and objectively at the existing evidence on both sides of this equation. I don't believe that many others have done this. As I said, I was once a "conspiracy fanatic." To me the "Oswald acting alone" side far out weighs the other.
That doesn't mean there aren't other explanations. Only that right now the preponderance of evidence and unbiased analysis of it falls on that side.
One thing is certain, however; without the "sympathy" vote for the socialist LBJ and his Rat cronies, padding their majorities in Congress in '64, there would have been NO "Great Society" and the social/cultural destruction wreaked by same would have been less - far less. JFK was, after all, the last Democrat national figure to actually believe in Capitalism. (in my view).