Nothing novel - good backstory for the unfamiliar

The questionable:
The author seemed like a strong French (and British) apologist and that the French were largely at the mercy of their American overlords following WWII. If you want to get the angle on how everything from maybe '48-'49 onward was America's (and not France's) fault, this book is for you. The odd thing is that he does explicitly mention that the French (and British) resisted America's anti-colonial opinions and policies so as to support their own declining empires but doesn't put together that they sold their efforts to the US as a battle against Communism when it clearly wasn't.

Additionally, if you've studied Viet Nam's history at all you appreciate the problems with the Diem government. The author here specifically mentioned the increasingly "draconian" measures of the Diem government as he worked to solidify his power. This is a fair assessment. What's weird as that the increasingly draconian measures were standard policy by the North from the beginning. For example, they were executing the children of village leaders and even nailing their babies to walls & trees. Despite the horrors that were common to both sides in this the author barely even gives lip service to what the North was doing and makes them sound like noble victims for having to suffer the hardships of fighting an insurgency in that environment. Obviously, in the idealized sense, there should be no support for either government, but then that goes down the "Quiet American" path where one (like the author) can't seem to differentiate between ideality and reality. I only mention that because the author seems quite focused on Greene. It's not at the absurd level of Ward & Burns but it's there.

I have always been a little puzzled about historians'/authors' position on the breaking of the '54 agreement with regards to elections. There's no doubt that Ho would've won and that not allowing the elections was a bit ironic given that the government of the South was supposed to be some flavor of Democracy. However, the same people never seem to take a step or two deeper. What happens when Ho wins and his entourage follows? Is one to think that subsequent elections would've allowed the people to steer their government? Is it even remotely conceivable that the Vietnamese people could've had "buyer's remorse" and altered the Communist government once it had taken hold? This is the same government that killed and/or imprisoned thousands or tens of thousands in the North and later did the same to upwards of a hundred thousand? The problem with the analyses that I've seen regarding the '54 agreement is that they never both to explore the consequences of having allowed that election to happen.

The good:
There is a lot of good information in this book and while you can get it from any other combination of books at least here it's all in one spot. There was nothing I hadn't read somewhere else but it was good to have it summarized (again). It's worth the listen.

14 people found this helpful

Superb in Every Way

I could not stop listening to this book. The story is never boring. The narrator is perfect. I learned so much more about Vietnam and the scenes behind the war. The moral is profound. This one is easily in my top five of all time. None are better.

4 people found this helpful

Understanding Why We failed the People of Vietnam

My husband was an adviser in 1964 in the Central Highlands
He understood / and reported it was an anti colonial., civil war.
After his second tour, he suffered a heart attach at age 41...
I needed this deep dive into the history of the countries fight to be liberated from the French to understand his sacrifice

2 people found this helpful

Boring

Starts off very strong but after about a third of the way through it starts going downhill and remains super boring until the end. The narrator’s voice also never changes tone, ever.

1 person found this helpful

Epic in Detail and First Hand Viewpoints

This is a tremendous work, especially through 1954 and the end of the French period. I appreciated the personal level of the actors throughout. However, the epilogue begins a descent into leftist tropes that are very evident in the later Ken Burns documentary. Even McCarthy is blamed for the American escalation in the 1960s which is bizarre to say the least. The Second Indochina War was not the dismal result that the First was. The author blurs this probably due to his ideological leanings but I recommend the book nonetheless as its overall narrative of the French period is something we should all learn more about.

clear history of Vietnam before US

Clear history of the political discussion on Vietnam. Great to listen. Well read. Thanks Mr. Sanders
j

A tremendous

A tremendous history of Vietnam from the 30s to the beginning of American "solo involvement"

Excellent

Studied Vietnamese “insurgency” in college. This book is perfect for those in need of a primer on the French colonial experience through to the initial American commitment.

And unbiased history of how do United States got involved in Vietnam.

This is a good history but very hard to listen to because of the many mistakes made by our government in supporting first the French that I corrupt South Vietnamese government. It is admittedly in my judgment a little biased but still very factual very well done and very well worth the read

Vietnam; French to USA involvement

very detailed - focused on French occupation to Vietnam gorilla war to Independance.

Details tragedy of Roosevelts death and the impact of Truman blowing off Ho Chi Minh - when Ho Chi Min wanted to be a Jeffersonian anti colonialist formed from an American mold.