Jump to content

Talk:Charlie Wilson (Texas politician)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.194.247.53 (talk) at 14:58, 5 May 2010 (→‎Unencyclopedic speculations). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Chasing Russian submarines

The wording there was odd, so I took out the references to diesel and nuclear submarines. If someone wants to restore them, they should explain when he stopped chasing diesel subs and started going after nuclear ones- did he change ships, was his ship reassigned, did the Russians phase out diesel subs, etc. Stilgar135 22:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Charlie was a staunch supporter of Ronald Reagan's efforts to defeat communism, particularly insofar as thwarting Russia's submarine efforts was concerned. As the Washington representative of a towed sonar array manufacturer I had the occasion to visit his office in 1982. As a member of the House Approrpiations Committee as well as a fellow alumnus of the Naval Academy Charlie was most interested in learning more about this new destroyer sensor. The highlight of our talk was when he asked me, "Will it defeat the Communists?" I replied that towed arrays would play a significant role in protecting our carrier task forces from the submarine threat. It was rewarding to see the 1983 Navy budget funding the initial procurement of towed sonar arrays.

After seeing "Charlie Wilson's War" I exchanged letters with Charlie in 2008, telling him how much I enjoyed the movie. The last line of his response to me was, "Long live the heavily armed Doves". May he rest in peace. Tcgfa (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After speaking informally with quite a few Russians, I believe the families of slain and wounded Soviet conscripts blown to bits with Stinger missiles that he funded would disagree with your "may he rest in peace" assessment. To this day they're...not too happy with his most famous of Congressional appropriations activities. With all due respect, that had to be said. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.236.185 (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic speculations

I am the only one who finds the following assertion ridiculous: "Without Charlie Wilson, Communist Russia would have most likely crushed the Afghan resistance. Although most people are not aware of it, Charlie Wilson, with the help of many others, helped bring down the communist government by supplying millions of dollars to the Afghan Mujahideen to beat the soviets in Afghanistan". --Ghirla -трёп- 09:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Read the non-fiction book Charlie Wilson's War. "Without Charlie Wilson, Communist Russia would have most likely crushed the Afghan resistance." is quite factual.


-- Charlie Wilson had a significant influence on the level of support the Afghan Mujahideen received from the United States. Whether or not the Muj would have been crushed without Charlie is conjecture.

Hind sight is 20/20 that may be the reason to praise Mr.Wilson. He also taught Muslims of that region how to become Taliban. In reality, he created modern Jehadi terrorists.

Too patriotic

This article is way too patriotic. It needs to be revised to reflect a more neutral stance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.196.181.132 (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Has the subject expressed any remorse for what was clearly a totally harebrained policy? What are his views about his own responsibility for transforming Afghanistan into an Al Qaeda paradise? People like Wilson continue to insist that America's biggest problem is Russia, but the real problem is them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.200.12 (talk) 18:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a forum on Wilson or America (though comment is masked as a complaint about NPOV. Above two comments should be removed.Profhum (talk) 04:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While you are right about WP not being a forum on Wilson/America, it is our policy not to delete forum posts.Drewson99 (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is true, generally speaking. However, per Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Others.27_comments: Editing others' comments is sometimes allowed, but you should exercise caution in doing so. Some examples of appropriately editing others' comments: . . . Deleting material not relevant to improving the article (per the above subsection Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#How to use article talk pages). . . . --Evb-wiki (talk) 16:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can God send ANY of us to Hell? For Fuck's sake some of the shit I read out here is more sinister than the average guy can even dream of. No wonder nobody cares anymore. I can't wait for all this shit to blow up in all of your faces.

Wow, he was hot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.15.38 (talk) 19:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evil incarnate. Support for terrorists, opposition to tax exemptions for the bleedin *elderly*, AND a lobbyist?! Aadieu (talk) 02:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This userbox says it all:
Sf46 (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somoza Support

I feel this page would be a lot more complete with a section concerning Wilson's support of the Somoza regime of Nicaragua in the late 1970s, fighting to increase American military aid to Nicaragua, in spite of the fact that the Somoza's were notorious human rights violators. However, it's an area I'm rather ignorant in, and I really only have one source (Cynthia J. Arnson, 'Crossroads: Congress, The President, and Central America, 1976-1993.' Pantheon Books: 1993). Any opinions on whether this subject should be added? (134.153.101.102 06:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

If you can provide coverage of the support in a balanced way, then go ahead. 1ne 23:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Entry into Politics

I removed the line stating that Wilson staffed his Congressional Office with tall, attractive women as there is no citation for this employment pattern.--Mhundley1962 20:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nothing about the scandals?

what about the reports by Sy Hersh about him flying around with beauty queens?

References needed

The article states: "some now credit it with being a contributing factor to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union". This reference to the speculations of unknown individuals should require references. Who gives it credit? How was it a contributing factor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.82.171.153 (talk) 06:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation (modifier) move

Currently, the article on this Charles "Charlie" Wilson is disambiguated as Charles Wilson (politician). However, there's another "Charlie Wilson" politician, disambiguated as Charlie Wilson (Ohio politician). Additionally, there exist: Charles Wilson (Canadian politician), Charles Wilson (New Zealand) (also a politician). It would seem to me that this article should be moved to Charles Wilson (Texas politician), to disambiguate him from the other Charles/Charlie Wilson politicians. ENeville 22:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The new film might make this Charles Wilson the most notable of the politicians, but if the page is moved it should probably be "Texan politician" rather than "Texas politician". —MJBurrageTALK04:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, with states as a modifier for a noun, the state name is used, not the residential form. For the other Charlie Wilson, we don't say "Ohioan politician"; nor would we say "New Yorker politician" and so forth. "Texas politician" is correct. Softlavender (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The renaming was probably a good idea, but I think it would have been better if the person who did the rename had followed up by changing all of the links. I've changed a couple, but there are probably many more that need to be fixed. Must admit that I don't really feel motivated to do this myself right now. Maybe later... --RenniePet (talk) 13:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is he today?

Seems to be a basic question this article doesn't answer. I'll look into it, but this article will need some extra meat given the movie.Lord of the Ping (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can get some details from this [[1]].

- Retired to Lufkin in 1997

- Heart transplant in 2006

Since he left congress, the short summary is that he has been trying to drink or snort himself to death. And he can't even do that right. I really don't know why anyone thought he was worth making a film about.
The problem I have with the article is that there is a whole lot missing. The film in my opinion is a joke because it makes a really awful guy into something he never was. He was a coke-headed drunk who went out of his way to offend anyone around him and most especially women. There is about 20 years about bad material about him thats missing. The article should add more about the hit-and-run incident, his drug use, his ties to a whole bunch of scandals around 1979. There is the whole thing where his whore fought with Somoza's whore that time in Miami. His whore is still in the witness protection program. I'll try to help add things (with cites) if I get time. The pointer to the DMN article should help I hope. 172.132.87.193 (talk) 23:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The film does not disguise his being a "bad guy". All it points out is that the policy he made was much more important to society than his personal life. It doesn't matter whether he had fun in the off time if during duty he was one of the most powerful congressmen. He deliberately exaggerated his bad boy persona. If you read the book you will start to notice some of this.

Yes, it seems you missed the point of the movie, 172. As they say during the scandal, as long as prosecutors are asking about sex and drugs, you could drive a tank right up beside them and they wouldn't know (not a direct quote). You'd be one of those people that busies themselves with judgments based on personal scandals while ignoring their actual job performance -- ie. how they run the country.Equazcion /C 17:25, 5 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Congressional Committees

Is there a way to include Congressman Wilson's membership in Congressional Committees and Subcommittees? Thanks, (74.134.124.3 (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

The woman in the background portrayed by Julia Roberts???

Was there actually a Texas married woman like the one portrayed in the movie? If so, I'd like to know more about her. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.3.187 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the History Channel documentary (and a Wikipedia article), Joanne Herring was an actual person. She appeared in the interviews. Her marital status may be a different matter. Sf46 (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the book Charlie Wilson's war, she is a widow, and her and Wilson apparently had a romantic relationship with a lot more depth than depicted in the film. Tsaraleksi (talk) 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The woman was also interviewed as part of the bonus material on the DVD. ThetaSax (talk) 10:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plagarism

Just a note, this: "For the next 12 years, Wilson made his reputation in the Texas legislature as the "liberal from Lufkin", viewed with suspicion by business interests. He battled for the regulation of utilities, fought for Medicaid, tax exemptions for the elderly, the Equal Rights Amendment, and a minimum wage bill," is copied directly from Crile's book on Wilson. I'm not sure what the policies on that kind of thing are, so I'll not change it, but I figured it's important enough to note.

Tsaraleksi (talk) 23:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this too. It doesn't even mention the source, so it might be best to paraphrase and recite it. 147.9.230.117 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USNA Reference

The #2 footnote links to an Annapolis Capital article on Charlie Wilson about the time the film premeired. The reference to Wilson having the second most demerits in Academy history is based on a joke he told. This reference is not accurate. Besides, if a Midshipman accumulates 300 demerits, they are seperated, so it is not a running contest. Sharrw (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

charlie wilsons head is big —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.221.62.134 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which Wilson's girlfriend did Somoza hit on?

Just a suggestion: Since two Wilsons (Charlie and Ed) appear in the paragraph about Somoza, it might be good to clarify which of them had the girlfriend fondled by Somoza.Beachdogz (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]