

#15001
Mentioned in 2 episodes
Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam
Book • 2014
In 'Dereliction of Duty,' H.R.
McMaster provides a thorough and convincing analysis of how and why the United States became involved in the Vietnam War. The book is based on newly released transcripts and personal accounts of crucial meetings and decisions from 1963 to 1965.
McMaster argues that domestic political considerations, rather than Cold War ideology, drove the failed strategy of graduated military pressure.
He criticizes the actions of Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, General Maxwell Taylor, McGeorge Bundy, and other top aides for their arrogance, weakness, and deception of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, and the American public.
The book highlights the failure of the military leadership to provide honest advice and their complicity in supporting a flawed strategy.
McMaster provides a thorough and convincing analysis of how and why the United States became involved in the Vietnam War. The book is based on newly released transcripts and personal accounts of crucial meetings and decisions from 1963 to 1965.
McMaster argues that domestic political considerations, rather than Cold War ideology, drove the failed strategy of graduated military pressure.
He criticizes the actions of Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, General Maxwell Taylor, McGeorge Bundy, and other top aides for their arrogance, weakness, and deception of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, and the American public.
The book highlights the failure of the military leadership to provide honest advice and their complicity in supporting a flawed strategy.
Mentioned by
Mentioned in 2 episodes
Mentioned by ![undefined]()

as books written by General McMaster.

Joshua Huminski

11 snips
Special Episode: Coffee & Conflict Interview with General H.R. McMaster
Mentioned by 

as a book about the flaws and failures of the Vietnam War.


Ryan Holiday

Lt. General H.R. McMaster on Strategic Empathy and Seneca’s Contradiction