You can beat around the bush as much as you want, but the evidence presented is unequivocal: Ming annexed Annam, thereby violating the mandate of their original wargoal. The evidence also makes it clear that the Annamese did not welcome their occupier and repeatedly rebelled against them. Therefore, the war between Ming and Annam was a war of aggression. This is a factual, not an ethical judgment.
Nobody's beating around the bush. You are the one insisting that only your interpretation is valid.
By doing this, you just showed your true colors. You are not actually interested in a discussion, you are just looking to push your views on everyone else.
Too bad nobody gives a damn about what you think.