Final answer:
O'Brien's account of the Vietnam War exposes the discrepancies between the official U.S. military reports and the actual experiences of soldiers, as well as the Pentagon Papers' revelation of the government's misleading information, all leading to a public credibility gap and growing anti-war sentiment.
Step-by-step explanation:
O'Brien's account of the Vietnam War is a reflection on the complex and often contradictory experiences of American soldiers, the inconsistencies in official government reports compared to the reality on the ground, and the impact of these factors on public perception back home. During the conflict, the U.S. engaged in intense bombing campaigns and committed a large number of troops, hoping to deter the North Vietnamese support for the insurgency in the South, but the war's progress did not align with what was often portrayed by officials, leading to disillusionment and a credibility gap between public statements and the unfolding situation.
Reports such as the CBS's Cam Ne piece and the revelations of the Pentagon Papers, leaked by Daniel Ellsberg, contributed to a significant shift in public opinion. Graphic media stories and the Tet Offensive of 1968, where communist forces launched coordinated attacks on American and South Vietnamese sites, proved that the war was far from the victory military leaders claimed it was nearing.
Increasing vetoes' protests upon returning home and speaking out against the war which they experienced firsthand contrasted sharply against the Pentagon's official reports of victories. This juxtaposition of reality versus the official narrative contributed to a growing anti-war sentiment and a broader sense of skepticism towards the U.S. government's handling of the war.