LBJ lamented giving up on the "Great Society" when he inherited the situation in Vietnam. "The Great Society" was perhaps dead but a great deception was escalating. Stated in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, 1964:
"... the United States is assisting the peoples of southeast Asia to protect their freedom and has no territorial, military or political ambitions in that area, but desires only that these peoples should be left in peace to work out their own destinies in their own way..." (Emphasis added)
By this time certain fictions had snowballed, new ones were created, and what was being established remained unchallenged. For instance, John Foster Dulles in the Eisenhower administration stated that communism was a monolithic block. Evidence indicates that the issue was far more complex, however what was perceived as reality influenced policy. "Containment" was the basis of such policy, thus how can any reasonable perspective not see that US intervention was in fact territorial. Self-deception ran very deep from the outset and continued.
There were political ambitions- the political maneuvering took place on a world map between polarized superpowers. Relevant to this point, continuing self-deception in the Kennedy administration is apparent is the statement of Henry Cabot Lodge, who warned against letting 240 million people in the area of southeast Asia fall to communism. "Losing" more of the East was definitely political, and bi-partisan. It was hardly a humanitarian concern.
Of course when it was difficult to establish the democracy that needed defending, there was a need to increase military involvement. It is interesting how the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution negates all evident rationale. Much can be said to further support this conclusion. But another point is that when we look at history we need to make certain acknowledgments, which in this case deals with intentions. Calling this a great lie might suggest deliberate negative intentions. Since certain perceptions were taken for reality, it is perhaps better to call this a very serious endemic of deception.
I believe there is a lesson in all this which is relevant to the political philosophies of the current Republican presidential candidate. The campaign often takes history out of context and uses deceptive tactics. They appeal to the anti-intellectualism which take issues at face value, and like Dulles, cannot see the greater complexities.