Argument Without End citations are historical transposition There s something in the Diem Era section stating that McNamara wrote X about motivations in Argument Without End I would be leery of ascribing this as a contemporary statement in the 1950s which is what the phrase indicates because McNamara wrote the book in 1999 one of several he wrote on Vietnam long after the fact It s obviously important as is the other work but I think it benefits from hindsight more than being reliable to the times and I would rather see it placed in its own Legacy Criticism whatever section than being used as a reliable historical source for this article