Jim in Anchorage Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I just watched Bill Oreilly ask Ted Turner [ and I paraphrase ] "both you and Jane Fonda were active in getting the U.S to leave Vietnam, which we did. this resulted in the murder of 3 million Vietnamese and Cambodians by the very Commmunsts you supported. TedTurner"I never thought of that" I kid you not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Jarhead Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 That Ted Turner is no rocket surgeon, let me tell you. I haven't seen the interview, but was he serious? And also, what was Turners role WRT Fonda? They weren't together during her Hanoi Jane days, were they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 That Ted Turner is no rocket surgeon, let me tell you. I haven't seen the interview, but was he serious? And also, what was Turners role WRT Fonda? They weren't together during her Hanoi Jane days, were they? A. Dead serious B. No. just same views on war. If you can find this, after his admission he said " the media didnt cover that" unbeliveable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I just watched Bill Oreilly ask Ted Turner [ and I paraphrase ] "both you and Jane Fonda were active in getting the U.S to leave Vietnam, which we did. this resulted in the murder of 3 million Vietnamese and Cambodians by the very Commmunsts you supported. TedTurner"I never thought of that" I kid you not. Wonderful! Sound bite history. Just to play contrarian, do you think it was ok for the United States to launch a massive bombing raid on Cambodia, or to undermine and help overthrow its ruler? And how many more bombs should we have dropped on Vietnam? That tiny country country had more American bombs fall on it than we dropped in World War Two. Hadn't we done enough damage to those countries by 1973? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 So if I understand O'Reilly correctly, Turner and Fonda were responsible for us getting out of Vietnam AND for the subsequent deaths of 3 million Vietnamese and Cambodians. Other than the fact that Turner and Fonda used to play bocci ball with Pol Pot using the skulls of those they murdered as the balls, I'm not aware of any other direct connection between the two. Why haven't they been brought to the Hague and charged accordingly in the world court? Thank God for Bill O'Reilly. I shudder to think where we'd be without him to shine that light on history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Wonderful! Sound bite history. Just to play contrarian, do you think it was ok for the United States to launch a massive bombing raid on Cambodia, or to undermine and help overthrow its ruler? And how many more bombs should we have dropped on Vietnam? That tiny country country had more American bombs fall on it than we dropped in World War Two. Hadn't we done enough damage to those countries by 1973? Truth be told, if you measure the tonnage of bombs that hit something other than trees, Vietnam and WWII were probably about even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 Your missing the point. Turner WAS the media!! ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Your missing the point. Turner WAS the media!!! You've lost me. Turner was the media during Viet Nam and its aftermath? Well, he was the media if you count his billboard advertising business as THE media of the time. CNN wasn't started until 1980, well after the fact. Seriously, how was Turner the media at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 11, 2008 Author Share Posted December 11, 2008 You've lost me. Turner was the media during Viet Nam and its aftermath? Well, he was the media if you count his billboard advertising business as THE media of the time. CNN wasn't started until 1980, well after the fact. Seriously, how was Turner the media at the time? Turner Broadcasting System,1970. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 "In 1970, R. E. Turner, then head of a successful Atlanta-based outdoor advertising firm, purchased WJRJ-Atlanta, Channel 17, a small, struggling UHF station, and renamed it WTCG, for parent company Turner Communications Group. Through careful programming acquisitions, Turner guided the station to success. In December 1976, WTCG originated the "superstation" concept, transmitting via satellite to cable systems In 1979, the company changed its name to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS, Inc.) and the call letters of its flagship entertainment network to WTBS. In 1980, the company broke new ground with the launch of CNN, the first 24-hour all-news network, forever changing the way the world saw breaking news. Today, CNN services reach nearly one billion people around the globe." (http://turnerbroadcasting.com/about/corporate_history.html) Suffice it to say that a "SMALL STRUGGLING UHF STATION" probably didn't have a major impact on the war in Vietnam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 11, 2008 Author Share Posted December 11, 2008 "In 1970, R. E. Turner, then head of a successful Atlanta-based outdoor advertising firm, purchased WJRJ-Atlanta, Channel 17, a small, struggling UHF station, and renamed it WTCG, for parent company Turner Communications Group. Through careful programming acquisitions, Turner guided the station to success. In December 1976, WTCG originated the "superstation" concept, transmitting via satellite to cable systems In 1979, the company changed its name to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS, Inc.) and the call letters of its flagship entertainment network to WTBS. In 1980, the company broke new ground with the launch of CNN, the first 24-hour all-news network, forever changing the way the world saw breaking news. Today, CNN services reach nearly one billion people around the globe." (http://turnerbroadcasting.com/about/corporate_history.html) Suffice it to say that a "SMALL STRUGGLING UHF STATION" probably didn't have a major impact on the war in Vietnam. Please read the posts and try to understand my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Please read the posts and try to understand my point. Which point is it today? a. Turner + Fonda = Bad b. Clinton = Bad c. Liberals = Bad d. Obama = Bad e. All of the above My guess is e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Vietnam is finally over with this last election, IMO. It played a role in 2004 but McCain's loss this year showed it just doesn't really matter that much anymore. The "Stab in the Back" theory much pushed on the right that the media is to blame for us losing in Nam is taken to absurd lengths by Jim here. The Stab theory relys more on Tet in 1968 than anything. That battle WAS a huge American victory looking at it on the face of things. It was a failure for the United States if you put it in context of the time. LBJ, McNamaa and the rest of them were going on and on about how the war was just about won, how we just needed to get past the 1968 election and all would be fine, blah, blah. Then the Vietnmese pulled off a stunning attack. Why was it so stunning? Because the very people that were were suppose to be protecting said nothing while the North smuggled in thousands of troops, weapons and other supplies right under our noses and no one said anything about it. All across the south this was happening yet the attack was a surprise. After this happened many Americans, including Walter Cronkite turned against the war. Yet it went on for another six years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 ???? Am i dreaming or is there actually people in the USA that think the US should have stayed in Vietnam longer than they did?!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 ????Am i dreaming or is there actually people in the USA that think the US should have stayed in Vietnam longer than they did?!!! I do. The war was drawing to a close within 6 mo to a year it would have ended , however many people died as a result of the pull out. The public was war weary. Now days most people only go by what they read now , as they werent alive then or were not very old. The Sec. of Defense then I would like to Rumsfeld during Iraq. The President takes advice from them and if the advice is bad so is the decision of the President. And forget the news media as they only want bad news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 "In 1970, R. E. Turner, then head of a successful Atlanta-based outdoor advertising firm, purchased WJRJ-Atlanta, Channel 17, a small, struggling UHF station, and renamed it WTCG, for parent company Turner Communications Group. Through careful programming acquisitions, Turner guided the station to success. In December 1976, WTCG originated the "superstation" concept, transmitting via satellite to cable systems In 1979, the company changed its name to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS, Inc.) and the call letters of its flagship entertainment network to WTBS. In 1980, the company broke new ground with the launch of CNN, the first 24-hour all-news network, forever changing the way the world saw breaking news. Today, CNN services reach nearly one billion people around the globe." (http://turnerbroadcasting.com/about/corporate_history.html) Suffice it to say that a "SMALL STRUGGLING UHF STATION" probably didn't have a major impact on the war in Vietnam. But isn't it possible that Turner's future creation of CNN is what caused him to buy WTCG ten years earlier, thus causing him to be THE MEDIA back in 1970?... Nah. Makes more sense to simply ignore the fact that time moves forward and not backward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 ????Am i dreaming or is there actually people in the USA that think the US should have stayed in Vietnam longer than they did?!!! <cough>Dien Bien Phu<cough> I don't think Americans have to take any abuse over Vietnam from a Frenchman. We wouldn't have been there to begin with if it wasn't for you yellow post-war commie imperialist Gaullist frogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 <cough>Dien Bien Phu<cough> I don't think Americans have to take any abuse over Vietnam from a Frenchman. We wouldn't have been there to begin with if it wasn't for you yellow post-war commie imperialist Gaullist frogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 I do. The war was drawing to a close within 6 mo to a year it would have ended , however many people died as a result of the pull out. The public was war weary. Now days most people only go by what they read now , as they werent alive then or were not very old. The Sec. of Defense then I would like to Rumsfeld during Iraq. The President takes advice from them and if the advice is bad so is the decision of the President. And forget the news media as they only want bad news. It was always drawing to an end. In 1967 it was almost over, samething a year later, in 1970, same thing. People got tired of the bull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 It was always drawing to an end. In 1967 it was almost over, samething a year later, in 1970, same thing. People got tired of the bull The draft age people and their families were the ones concerned. Cant say I blame them . Actually this was the advent of the volunteer force . Too bad the slugs had to be mixed with the decent troops back then. Of course Obama will reinstate the draft for the people wanting change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts