American G.I. as TIME Person of the year?

That's what I'm hearing.

Edit for link:

http://www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/archive/stories/

On the right.

eom

Yes, certainly, anyone but the Bush-Hog.

Once before in WW II. So who bribed 'em?

Who bribed who?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031221/ap_on_re_us/time_person_of_year&cid=519&ncid=716
<snip>
The selection echoes 1950, the year the Korean War began, when editors picked the American GI for the cover, writing that "it was not a role the American had sought, either as an individual or as a nation. The U.S. fighting-man was not civilization's crusader, but destiny's draftee."

.. But I'm not 100% sure yet, it's a buried pic on TIME's web site.

That could create a stir.

One White Sergeant
One White Specialist
One Black no-rank Private



One must really wonder!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I hope to God Bush doesn't get the distinction. I hate him.

Hitler and Stalin got it too

They did/are doing their job FAR,FAR better than anyone could have imagined. If there are any real failures, it at home. With us.

Grok

In the desert without the right equipment, getting shot at and blown up, screwed by George W. back at home.

They deserve it a lot more than GW or Tommy Franks or anyone else they may have considered.

They deserve it more than we can express

Since, sometimes, Time has chosen reprehensibles like the Ayatolla Khomeini and Hitler as Person of the Year, I was wondering if they might pick Saddam.

But I like this MUCH better. As with the three female whistleblowers last year, I like the symbolism...

Besides, I REALLY like that it's not going to be yet another grovelfest to bush.

My adopted soldier only killed 5 iraqi school children and 3 brownish adults this week and was getting a little depressed about missing quota. This oughta cheer him up.

More to your liking?

Only if the Christians attacked the bomber unjustly in his homeland and the bombing was an act of defense. I oppose all unjust offensive violence from any side, as should most people. I go so far as to oppose the actions of those who participate in unjust invasions and killings of innocent humans. These people need to be responsible for such actions, no matter who told them to do so. They are all humans, and can still think.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I wouldn't participate in the filling of canteens, as that water would aid them in committing actions I believe are unjust against the humans.


My view of what the soldiers are involved in in Iraq has nothing to do with putting a party over our country, because such action is not in service of the the USA, but rather in service of elite corporations. It is not in their job description to attack foreign nations in unjust conflicts, but rather, to defend our own and our constitution. I condemn them on not carrying out their job, and furthermore, on contributing to a military machine that makes it easier for people like Bush to kill others. I can only express my patriotic respect for those soldiers who have stood for what their country really stands for, taken responsibility for their actions, put their guns down, and went home. Newsflash: many of the people in the 60's were correct.


I welcome Rush Limbaugh. Let me know if he responds on his show, as I wont be listening.


(BTW, I should surely hope that if a man breaks into my house, he wouldn't be so deluded as to think he has the moral highground to shoot back at me, but rather, only to leave.)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

No wonder the party is so screwed up right now.

We need to purge these jokers. They don't belong in the Democratic party

Ask me if I am or ever was a member of the communist party, and then purge me despite my answer.


The democratic party grew strong by encouraging the sharing of ideas from many viewpoints, not but abscribing to only one, which may or may not appeal to the masses (some 70% of which approved of the war). You, not I, may be in the wrong party.

It's kind of a strange coincidence that the original post by our newest member is copied lock, stock and barrel from that 'other' place. Even down to one of the comments.

On edit: Deleting the link and proof. Why humor those morans?

May they rest gently in peace as the world becomes a better place :)

call exterminator Tom (Chickenhawk) Duh-lay ..

only you have what it takes to unscrew the party, only you can decide who belongs in the Democratic Party. I expect your report on my desk my 9am.

We cannot afford to be viewed as a Soldier bashing community a la Viet Nam. All THEY need to do is plant someone in here, and post an incendiary remark like this one, just to see what morons take the bait.
This is a public forum, and we have to be aware of that. Free speech does not mean STUPID SPEECH.

..

We do not use war as a last resort all to often. In such cases, then I criticize.


Soldiers in our armed forces either think this or do not care. It is great they defend us unconditionally. I abhor it when they participate in the attack of other countries unjustly, as is the case in Iraq.


They are not dying so I do not have to. Iraq was not a threat. I would never have to die for that war. Truthfully, they are dying so Halliburton can get more contracts.


I do blame the people and the administration a whole damn lot for sending them there, but in no way does that justify their actions while there and nullify such crimes. They are still human, can think before acting, and hence, are personally responsible for their own actions.


In every case, a human, soldier or not, can contemplate their actions, and in such a case of an unjust invasion, Id expect nothing less than the patriotic soldier to put down their gun and come home. Period.


For those who were fooled, I would surely expect an apology (as a human) if/when they ever figured out that the people they killed had as much of a right to life as they did.

Soldiers...


They may perceive what they do as defense, but Iraq was never a threat.

They may perceive their service being to America, but their actions only serve corporate and elitists' intrests.

They may perceive war is a last resort, but this war was the first.

They may perceive they are dying for me, but they are dying for Bush and company.

They may perceive they have a right to kill those who opposse them, but they are an unjust invader oppressing those people.

They may percieve millions would die if they didn't kill their thousands in Iraq, but such is a debunked myth proven by a lack of WMDs.

They may percieve the earth is flat, but it is truly round.


If perception nullifies the unjust killing of humans, then should we have no criminals in America? Should there have been no Nurenberg trials? Is any action, done with an incorrected perception, not the responsibility of the actor? Should people be held accountable for having incorrect perceptions, and acting in such a manner upon them?


And for those whos perception falls much in line with the progressives on DU, and who still participate in such overseas, what do you say of them? Those who know better...



"Many with suffer for their rest of their lives. due to angst, needless guilt."

And them I commend, because perhaps they finally get it. Unfortunately, too late.

You ought to study humanity's history before going on a quixotic crusade on this one matter. It is not perfect, Marx was right, and Soldiers do Soldierly things.
You can now go back to chanting 'Hari Krishna' in an airport of whatnot - life sucks, and perhaps reality avoidance is an answer for you.
In case you are wondering, I am not in favor of this war, but I am not in favor of subjecting an 18 year old impressionable private to a moral standard that only generals and presidents should be held to. There is definitely a sliding scale here, whether we like it or not.

"I am not in favor of subjecting an 18 year old impressionable private to a moral standard that only generals and presidents should be held to."

Despite social rank, status, or age, I feel it is wrong to kill a foreigner in an unjust invasion, just as it is wrong to order one. One day these kids will grow up, and I hope then they will feel such remorse for their behavior. Perhaps if we were a society that demanded people be held to such a standard, that of not committing unjust killings, then perhaps we wouldn't be the type of society that went to war constantly. You cannot hope to change a nation politically if you are unwilling to change the people themselves. We must change America one mind at a time. And from there, the politics we follow. If we are unwilling to touch the minds and only the policies, we will have lost before we begin. Enough said on this point. Im sure a few agree and the rest regard me with animosity. Despite any such opinion, I still had all the right, even moreso as a member of a liberal community, to post my views (just as you have a right to disagree). Let discourse remain our strongest attribute, and leave fascism for Ashcroft.

if you are old enough you ought to understand that
A) they've been lied to by their government for their entire lives and many have no way to understand that they are "in service of elite corporations".
and
B) there ARE people on THIS board with husbands, sons, daughters, or parents over there. I have lots of compassion for the Iraqi people but I also have compassion for the mothers, relatives and friends who are scared to death that their loved ones will come home in a body bag OR an emotional basket case from being trapped in a situation they are totally unprepared for. The process of deciding whether to carry out an order to go to Iraq or to face court-martial and go to jail involves a lot of factors beyond just "is this war right or wrong"?

Just because you have respect for conscientious objectors (as I do too) doesn't mean you can't have mature compassion for people who have been led into the wrong place at the wrong time. There are 150,000 individual stories behind the face of the GI, and MANY of them don't want to be there right now. Please try to open your heart to the entire human race in its wretchedness; it's hard but it's the only way forward.

There are some soldiers out there who have become totally deranged. I have JAG friends who've told me they don't even have the manpower to investigate half of the crimes being committed.

Putting soldiers on the cover of Time is just another step to glorifying that obscenity in Iraq and portraying them as heroes.

They are not heroes. They're young men and woman who are being abused by the Bush regime and the rest of the "USA, USA, USA" moran crowd that doesn't have a damn clue about how their beloved Rat-in-Chief can't even free up a few pennies to provide the Reserves and Gaurd with the proper equipment or how Dicky-Pooh's friends at Halliburton are serving the troops dirty food but hell, why would Freepers care? Such realities rock their little lala-land world that

Bush is good
Bush is God
We have liberated the Iraqis
We are Christian heroes
Those kids we shot this week in Iraq should not have been in the streets
Our soldiers, without an exception, are all as pure and good as our First Stepford Lady

There's nothing to glorify here. Those soldiers should be brought home and given some badly needed counselling so they can get on with their lives. That is if the Freepers can spare some of the money from their selfish tax cuts

Factoid for any Freepers reading this:
Medical evacuations from Iraq near 11,000
By Mark Benjamin
United Press International

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 (UPI) -- The total number of wounded soldiers and medical evacuations from the war in Iraq is nearing 11,000, according to new Pentagon data provided in response to a request from United Press International.

The military has made 8,581 medical evacuations from Operation Iraqi Freedom for non-hostile causes in addition to the 2,273 wounded -- a total of 10,854, according to the new data. The Pentagon says that 457 troops have died.

<snip>
In response to a request from UPI about non-hostile incidents, the Army Medical Command this week released data that show 3,843 medical evacuations for "non-battle injuries" and 4,738 for "disease" between March 19 and Nov. 30. Examples of non-battle evacuations were for bone injuries and surgery, the Army said. Examples of disease evacuations include brain, heart, stomach, or mental problems. The evacuations include causes as diverse as dental problems and gynecological issues.

<snip>

It also excludes an unknown number of troops treated in Iraq who did not require a medical evacuation, and soldiers whose illnesses do not show up until later, like post-traumatic stress disorder.

<snip>
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20031217-032344-8720r

====
Pentagon warned Halliburton-KBR on "dirty" food service

The Pentagon repeatedly warned contractor Halliburton-KBR that the food it served to US troops in Iraq was "dirty," as were as the kitchens it was served in, NBC News reported Friday.

Halliburton-Kellogg Brown and Root's promises to improve "have not been followed through," according to a Pentagon report that warned "serious repercussions may result" if the contractor did not clean up, the television network reported.

The Pentagon reported finding "blood all over the floor," "dirty pans," "dirty grills," "dirty salad bars" and "rotting meats ... and vegetables" in four of the military messes the company operates in Iraq, NBC said, citing Pentagon documents.

The report came as President George W. Bush fended off Pentagon reports that Halliburton-KBR overcharged 61 million dollars for gasoline it sold the military in Iraq. Dick Cheney ran Halliburton for five years until becoming vice president.

<snip>

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=1404

I would think many may share such sentiments (but perhaps not as strong of beliefs or willingness to share them). I feel it is my responsibility to use such harsh posts to at least present this idea amongst a current environment where such is sacreligious. As long is it remains so, our Prussia, our Rome awaits.


After all, we must, even if we do not always fully support such "reckless rhetoric", at least discuss it. This is a party based on an exchange of ideas and views, on intellect and discourse. We can accomplish nothing by avoiding the taboo, in fear of republican talking points. We all have the right, even if no one here agrees with it, to speak out. And I have now exercised such, fully aware of an onslaught to come. And as always, everyone has the right to fully disagree...isn't that, not war, what makes this country "great".

Nuremburg taught us that "just following orders" is no excuse, yet many here seem to believe that not only is it an excuse, but that the troops should be praised for doing so.

I believe that the troops themselves, while victims of this crime, are also perpetrators, like the abused child that grows up to abuse. The soldiers themselves must also be held accountable, so that in future soldiers will refuse to follow illegal orders - orders that lead to innocent lives being lost.

This is especially important in the case of the US military, because their power to destroy is so superior to other nations. In only a very short time they can unleash hell upon Earth, and as they say "bomb you back to the Stoneage".

With great power comes great responsibility, yet it seems that the American military is like a teenager whose clock is running backwards. Rather than maturing and learning to act more responsibly, it is growing more and more immature and is merely trying to find more and more reasons why it should not have to follow the rules everyone else has to live by.

At some point, the soldiers either have to say "NO!" or they have to accept their shared responsibility for the crimes they are commiting. That time is long past.

Once again, thanks for adding your voice to this discussion, and welcome to DU. :-)

It is extremely difficult to say no.

One of my soldiers, one of my best soldiers, did just that in Iraq- he said no twice and upon the third direct order fired away. He is now home but 4 months later he still sits around with what they call the thousand yard stare thinking of the kids he killed. His life is ruined for a long time and I don't know if he's going to pull through especially since he's not getting the counselling he needs (tax cuts, Halliburton, tax cuts) even though he's an Active Duty soldier which gives the government NO excuse to deprive him of this care.

But back to saying no, Terwilliger and I were discussing this one day and I was trying to explain how they can't really say no. The government has got them by the balls with the "All volunteer Military" concept. Their lives are all tied up in the military and many of these kids have families who live on post who rely on that small pay-check to survive so they went... also believing that they were going to fight a worthy cause because they're fed unadulterated propaganda day after day.

I think that as we transition to the occupation mode, more and more will start searching their consciences and making that stand. The moment can't come too soon but they will be crucified by the government at a very bad time economically.

I know Bush will rot in hell for his crimes- this particular one is unpardonnable.

I too support your right to speak here, but I think you should admit that you are causing more pain to already-broken-hearts. If my son was over there after I'd spent 18 years raising him -- maybe he joined against my wishes to be admired by his dad, for example -- I'd be insane with worry; and then I'd have to read your hostile and condemnatory feelings about it..?

I think the Time article is likely to be 65% glorification and 35% exposure for the unnecessary misery which they are being put through...i.e., perhaps Time will get the voices of anger from the soldiers for being over there; perhaps they will discuss the lack of benefits they have when they get back; and some of the suffering they go through. Who knows, maybe they will show pictures of funerals thus far banned from the media?

The shear sickness that a nation would send its youth off to kill and be killed in a foreign country is unimaginable. The more thought and attention given to flesh-and-blood soldiers, the better, as the truth will seep through the small spaces in the story between the flag-waving. Into whatever consciousness this sleeping nation may still possess.

I'm glad we've got retired Millitary people on this board like you to make our side more credible than their's.

To earn that reputation? Just like Rambo?

And there are quite a few Vets, Active Duty, Reserves and Guard here. I've been shocked at how many DUers have kids and siblings over there. One of our newer DUers is a young kid whose father is over there. It's so heart-breaking but infuriating to see those "never-last-long-at-DU" types acting as if they have a monopoly on service.

Ah well, those lovely morans- head, neck optional you know.

"They are not heroes. They're young men and woman who are being abused by the Bush regime and the rest of the "USA, USA, USA" moran crowd that doesn't have a damn clue about how their beloved Rat-in-Chief can't even free up a few pennies to provide the Reserves and Gaurd with the proper equipment or how Dicky-Pooh's friends at Halliburton are serving the troops dirty food but hell, why would Freepers care? Such realities rock their little lala-land world that..."

I wish I had some kind of a Bible or time capsule or something to put that in. People of every generation need to hear this, because not everyone gets to understand how they're only being used for financial gain. Your point is so important. It can't be overemphasized. Not enough people come anywhere near understanding it, and most don't even bother with the first words in the sentence.

If you want a Bible PM me, I'll send you an excellent one with that personally written in the front cover ;)

Peace

Do you really think that was appropriate? I can tell you have never served your country. Thanks for nothing.

Do we have to a man of the year? Why not have a blank cover with a big question mark on it.

I'm hard pressed to think of one.

three fem fatale whistle blowers...
"COVER STORY Persons of the Year 2002 Women who took huge risks to"
no pix...tho from the Time© archive...


Both from Feb last year...?

More attempts to legitimize the illegal occupation of Iraq... :grr:

He thought he had it locked up.

If at first you don't succeed, start another war.

The front page states that they captured Saddam, yet today on DU I see threads about others having really captured Saddam -- drugging him and leaving him for the U.S. If these new stories are true, then they will surely tarnish the military's "image" and expose Time Magazine as a propaganda rag.

Not one

where are the WMD's
9/11 was preventable
The Saudis funded the 9/11 terra-ists
Saddam became a harmless "Bag-man from Baghdad"
The media's role in the public's delusions (Saddam-9/11, etc.)

"our glorious troops"...
Remember how the tele-screens in 1984 used to praise the soldiers
and sailors fighting for big brother...? Samething here.
Its the militarization of America. The exact same thing that they
did under Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany.

One may come away with an impression that is not the intended reason for the selection of the troops….it will take a little reading and as evidenced below, is not complementary to the administration….


NEW YORK (AP)--The American soldier, who bears the duty of "living with and
dying for a country's most fateful decisions," was named Sunday as Time
magazine's Person of the Year.
The magazine's editors chose the nameless soldier to represent the 1.4 million
men and women who make up the U.S. military, which led the invasion of Iraq nine
months ago and a week ago captured deposed leader Saddam Hussein.
About 130,000 U.S. soldiers remain in Iraq, with others deployed in
Afghanistan, South Korea and elsewhere.
Soldiers were singled out as the top newsmakers of the year because "the very
messy aftermath of the war made it clear that the mission had changed, that the
mission had not been completed and that this would be a story that would be with
us for months, if not years, to come," said Time Managing Editor Jim Kelly.

& shock the hell out of the public. I assure you that had my tush been stuck in Iraq for this, that's the picture I would have wanted to see as a soldier. It would have shown me that people really cared, really understood and that maybe the American public would soon bring an end to my night-mare.

Freepers, Politicians, General and Officers think these things mean anything to soldiers- they really don't. What means something is physical comfort, decent pay and respect. This little palliative is just like the parades. I will NEVER EVER forget tired troops coming back from Iraq. The 504th MI Brigade got off the plane, was given a couple of hours to go home and shower before having to march up and down the streets of Copperas Cove & Killeen, Texas so the people could show their "appreciation". It was not appreciated by us. True appreciation is decent pay, decent pay, decent pay. Lurking freepers out there, take heed- keep your magazine covers, keep your damn parades and bring the soldiers home!

The last decent pay raise that soldiers got was under President Carter when he gave they sat down and took the time to realize that Privates needed a 14% pay raise, Sergeants got about 10 and the higher they went up on the scale, the smaller the percentage got so that the "little people" could catch up.

Typical though, the pay raise Carter gave didn't take effect until Reagan became President and freepers, not understanding much, will yell you blue in the face telling you Reagan gave it.

Sorry for the rant :) Thanks for throwing in that additional detail.

The "mission" has always been dubious at best. No matter how many cover articles glorifying patriotism Time does, it doesn't change the fact that what the United States DOES has world consequences that you can't whitewash with clever media campaigns. Most people know a stinking lie when they see it, and the neocon's "con job" in Iraq is a perfect example.

:kick:

who is having his money ripped by a criminal administration and bundled and delivered in suitcases full of unmarked 20s to scumbag cheneys halliburton??

well??

Would that be too difficult? For once?

I disagree with using our troops like this unless they list the true casualties and all the hardships our soldiers are suffering in Iraq due to Bush's failed policy, and failure to set aside money so they can have the basic necessities they need to carry out their mission, whatever the hell it might be. Also, our troops have done many heroic and not-so-heroic things while over there. Will 'Time' report on what our troops have to go through on a daily basis--dodging bullets and bomb attacks, along with mentioning some of the civilians that were erroneously killed by trigger happy troops? If the G.I. is going to be 'Man of the Year', then I hope the horrors of war, and the fact that this is yet another war where a lying president has sent our troops to fight without a feasible plan of what they are supposed to be doing, and when they will be leaving is mentioned.

On edit: sorry about the crappy grammar--I've yet to fully wake up. I also wanted to add that if this gets Bush off the cover, good! Also, I mentioned the above, because being 'Times', 'Man of the Year' should hopefully get Americans to wake up to the plight of our soldiers, and not try to whitewash or glorify this war in any way. I said it very badly, though.

who came out in massive numbers - to the likes that we may never see again - unless Jr. wages war on France

Bush has destroyed both institutions.

Praising the American GI is actually a way of fostering support for the President's military policies by means of association. This is done frequently in politics to garner people's votes without ever mentioning the candidate. Remember, Bush strutted around on the aircraft carrier and served turkey in Iraq. If the American soldier is idolized, that will rub off on Bush.

Has anyone read this article yet? I am afraid to as I fear it will be a Fortune 500 puff piece (translation: propaganda furthering the will of the corporate elite). Which is, one, support our troops because they are defending our revenues and profits, and two, ignore the fact that they are actually creating ill will toward North America in the majority of the world.

:kick:

Two gay guys who got married.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

??? ???

Bush* is scum of the earth!

I see no problem with that!

for the reasons that were so eloquently presented in previous posts.

I just find that it so totally bizarre who the corporate media considers the newsmakers of the year as they are so busy over-reporting the lies (Jessica Lynch, toppling Saddam statue, Iraqi's showering troops with flowers etc)

...and under-reporting the truths (thousands of civilians killed and maimed, thousands of soldiers injured, allowing the adminstration to dicatate that they don't show body bags, the chimp avoiding funeral services etc.)