Complete bullshit, 100% historical revisionism. Johnson's perfumed princes who never left DC/VA/MD/NY were busy playing Risk at the WH, ignored input from the ground, and held both good and bad news from Vietnam in low esteem. They did not react to reports from anyone with dirty boots, but they reacted strongly to reports from the media (almost all of it bad - especially bad was the coverage of near-successful operations, prompting their cancellation).
Johnson was not interested in winning or losing the war - he and his inner circle wanted to perpetuate it for as long as politically viable for the benefit of certain contractors, as well as to assist in his war on poverty by using part of the pesky undertrained "underclass" to absorb shrapnel. Political interference, political incompetence, media criminality, and political criminality rendered the war in Vietnam a total waste of American life and money. Johnson, McNamara, and the rest are roasting in hell.
Why is the old hag trying to protect the legacy of that butcher? Because of his Great Society expansion of the fascist New Deal? Reflexive action to protect a (D)?
I think it's a little of both.
“Johnson was not interested in winning or losing the war - he and his inner circle wanted to perpetuate it for as long as politically viable for the benefit of certain contractors...”
I don’t know enough about this to say whether I agree or disagree with you, but I wonder what you think of JFK’s involvement in this, because I thought our military efforts in Viet Nam began under his watch. The historical impression I have of JFK (I was two when he was assassinated) was that he was strongly anti-communist so that he acted in good faith in trying to halt the expansion of communism in southeast asia. Although he was a democrat, it seems to me that he was much more conservative than the rest of the Kennedy family.