Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wilson applauds his 'War'
Washington Times ^ | April 28, 2008 | Christian Toto

Posted on 04/28/2008 10:11:23 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe

Former Rep. Charles Wilson played no official role in the making of last year's film "Charlie Wilson's War," which chronicled how he helped the Mujahedeen repel the invading Soviet army in the 1980s.

If the Texas Democrat had participated, it's clear he would have cast an actor to portray a figure all but ignored in Mike Nichols' production — President Reagan.

"He was absolutely essential to the victory," over the Soviets in Afghanistan, Mr. Wilson says during a phone interview to promote "War," out on DVD this week. ...

Mr. Wilson's work, by all accounts, helped bring about the Soviet's eventual retreat, hastening the end of the Cold War. But other players were just as important to the Soviet's defeat, even if they weren't seen in the Oscar-nominated film.

"If it hadn't been for [Mr. Reagan], there wouldn't have been any Stingers," Mr. Wilson says of the missiles that helped turn the tide in Afghanistan's favor. ...

"Charlie Wilson's War" ends with a cautionary note about the lack of follow-through that left a power vacuum in Afghanistan.

"The American people are a generous people, a creative people, a can-do people, but we have the world's shortest attention span," he says, a lesson he hopes will be applied to the current Iraq war.

"Learn from it. Finish the job," he notes, adding that the United States owes it to Iraq to reconstruct the battered nation. "We must at least try."

Mr. Wilson is less sanguine about the current impasse in the U.S. political system, which he says would have made his work arming the Mujahedeen impossible.

"We couldn't ever fight this war again," he says. "We did the whole thing without a serious leak to the press and without partisan games."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; charliewilson; cia; coldwar; reagan; stinger; ussr; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 04/28/2008 10:11:23 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

read later


2 posted on 04/28/2008 10:15:07 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
"...we have the world's shortest attention span,"

Comes from a nation watching too many sit-coms and tied-up-in-a-neat-bow cop shows.

3 posted on 04/28/2008 10:17:24 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
The film omitted all but an oblique reference to a "Republican president and Democratic Congress" toward the end.

Tom Hanks is no Charlie Wilson calling for us to learn lessons, and finish the job in Iraq.

.

4 posted on 04/28/2008 10:18:56 AM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Sounds like Wilson is the kind of Democrat that is sadly lacking these days. A Democrat who is a patriot.


5 posted on 04/28/2008 10:23:42 AM PDT by dfwgator (11+7+15=3 Heismans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Good find!


6 posted on 04/28/2008 10:24:48 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
"We couldn't ever fight this war again," he says. "We did the whole thing without a serious leak to the press and without partisan games."

Reminds me of a time when we could actually call democrats 'the loyal opposition'. Charlie is right. Iraq has proved it once again.
7 posted on 04/28/2008 10:28:52 AM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
"The American people are a generous people, a creative people, a can-do people, but we have the world's shortest attention span," he says, a lesson he hopes will be applied to the current Iraq war.
"Learn from it. Finish the job," he notes, adding that the United States owes it to Iraq to reconstruct the battered nation.

If it were up to Democrats, Iraq would be another Vietnam, and all the people worth saving and rebuilding the country for- namely the pro western, Muslim in name only secularists- would be dead like the Cambodians and south Vietnamese the Democrats (thanks John Kerry)and leftist media screwed over.

8 posted on 04/28/2008 10:29:26 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance


US President George W. Bush (L) greets former US Rep. Charlie Wilson at the annual White House Correspondents' Association dinner in Washington, April 26, 2008.



Joanne Herring in Afghanistan. A great American.
9 posted on 04/28/2008 10:35:10 AM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

If Wilson were still in politics, I suspect he’d have to be in Joe Lieberman’s party. ;-)


10 posted on 04/28/2008 10:40:34 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

“Keywords” are our friends.

The History Channel had a program on Charlie Wilson a couple of months ago. Found it very interesting and informative.


11 posted on 04/28/2008 10:45:05 AM PDT by Perseverando
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
Charlie Wilson's War" ends with a cautionary note about the lack of follow-through that left a power vacuum in Afghanistan.

This is another chestnut that you hear repeated over & over. What is meant by "follow-through"? The only thing that could have helped the weak & feuding Afghans would have been a MAC-V style military mission which probably would have failed. Then what? Introduction of ground troops? Not likely.

This is the flip-side of covert action. You can't just flip the publicity switch & expect the public to back "the next logical step".

12 posted on 04/28/2008 10:55:35 AM PDT by Tallguy (Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

People also forget that while this covert operation was succeeding, the Democrat leadership in Congress was fighting Reagan tooth & nail over Iran-Contra — which boiled down was a dispute over which branch should control foreign policy in Central America. Other than that, the 2 operations were somewhat similar in their mechanics.


13 posted on 04/28/2008 10:58:50 AM PDT by Tallguy (Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

The big follow through would be stuff like we’re doing now: building schools, helping the government get established, basic foreign aid type stuff. Some like to call it nation building, the important part is that it’s not just walking away without even so much as a “thanks”. We fought a proxy war in Afghanistan for the better part of a decade and when it ended we left almost as quickly as the Soviets, not only did it leave a power vacuum it turned a lot of people who were our friends into our enemies. Made it pretty clear we were just using them to irritate Russia, didn’t really care about the Afghani people. We made the place ripe for take over by people like the Taliban and then had the audacity to be shocked when it happened.


14 posted on 04/28/2008 11:07:41 AM PDT by discostu (down in the swamps with the gators and flamingos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
I read the book a couple of years ago, and saw the documentary and plan to see the movie. Charlie is a good-ole-boy.

My favorite Charlie quote was a response to an inquiry about why all his staffers were beautiful women. He replied "You can teach'em to type, but you can't teach'em to grow t*ts".

15 posted on 04/28/2008 11:11:23 AM PDT by jdub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Good for Charlie for giving President Reagan credit. The latest mantra on the left is that Ronnie had nothing to do with the Soviet Union’s fall.


16 posted on 04/28/2008 11:17:03 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
"...we have the world's shortest attention span,"

Comes from a nation watching too many sit-coms and tied-up-in-a-neat-bow cop shows.

Missed that part... Lost interest and didn't read down far enough...

17 posted on 04/28/2008 11:21:57 AM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: discostu
The big follow through would be stuff like we’re doing now: building schools, helping the government get established, basic foreign aid type stuff.

I suspect that the "security environment" in post-Soviet Afghanistan would have forced a military mission on the US fairly early-on. As I said, the US public would probably not have supported such action.

It's the same problem we faced in post-Saddam Iraq. You only need several dozen motivated trouble-makers with a few infantry weapons & some explosives and they can keep a neighborhood in an uproar.

18 posted on 04/28/2008 11:28:20 AM PDT by Tallguy (Tagline is offline till something better comes along...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
It was a good movie, and a better book. At one point, Wilson (largely on his own), pushed the CIA into approving transfers of ISRAELI weapons, with funding matched by SAUDIS, transmitted through PAKISTAN, for the AFGHANS!! And not one bullet had U.S. markings on it. (The Paks said they'd accept the Jewish weapons if the boxes did not have a "f-ing Star of David" on them.

Wilson, through the CIA, got an international medical/doctors' effort on the ground which served as the staging area for moving weapons into Afghanistan.

The movie downplays Reagan, but in truth, this was a case of multiple levels of effort often going down the same road. Ironically, the Dems in the House---who were being viewed nationally as anti-military---had to get behind Wilson's funding bills. So oddly enough, the Contras basically saved the Muj!!

19 posted on 04/28/2008 11:32:07 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Well, the book is a little clearer on this, blaming the Democrats for obstructing funding under Clinton. But it is true that no one wanted to build schools and hospitals. Whether this would have prevented the Taliban, I doubt. The problem was no leader emerged who could defeat the various warlords-—not even “the Lion” (forget his name-—assassinated right before 9/11).


20 posted on 04/28/2008 11:34:21 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson