TIME's POTY: The American Soldier

no matter what your view, i think great choice.

:toast:

Yeah, It'll be interesting to read the story and see if it's level-headed or patriotic tripe.

it's about who's really doing the work in iraq, i.e.: not *.

I hope the article references the great sacrifices made by the families of these soldiers. I was a GI brat and know well what a military life means.

Bah Dum Dum.

how about Marines, Sailors, and Airmen? Aren't they in Iraq too?

these pawns of Bush should be commended for their bravery even if it is misguided by our current administration. If they'd have given it to Bush I'd have made it my personal goal to gather and burn evrey copy of Time magazine I could get my hands on. Here's to our armed forces. :toast:

A soldier is a member of the US Army. What about Marines, Sailors, and Airmen? They are serving too.

that is all inclusive. Complain to Time magazine, not me. :shrug:

the word "soldier" includes ALL branches of the
military.

A soldier is someone who serves in the Army. An airman is someone who serves in the Air Force. A sailor is someone who serves in the Navy. And a marine is someone who serves in the Marines.

troops..

Nor are sailors, airmen, or Coastguardsmen.

In the U.S., a soldier is a term meant to designate a member of the U.S. Army.

Period.

Just wish they, as with every soldier ever, anywhere, wasn't fighting and dying for someone else's power grab.

what happened to the American peace activist? Not even considered?

trying to SAVE lives? I am not dissing the soldiers at all, but remember many of us were accused of treason, ridiculed arrested, roughed up and ignored supporting the troops by trying to keep them from being used as mercenaries for the PNAC war profiteers. Countless people worked tirelessly to prevent the deaths of thousands of human beings. But of course, since TIME was part of the effort to marganalise, belittle and ignore peace loving Americans and for that matter peace loving people all over the planet who came together to try to prevent a war for the first time in history, TIME can't be expected to acknowledge these millions of people.

:)

i'm just glad it wasnt *

Didn't they put some American on cover when we all knew it should have been bin Ladin? (my God I can not get the sp right)

Maybe the person of the Decade should be the crowd pleasing editorial board.

And absolutely fitting!

The military are the only ones who have been asked to sacrifice and they should be honored.

Meanwhile, back home all we are asked to do is consume, consume, consume! No mention of public service, no mention of energy conservation.
Has the American public ever been asked for so little at a time of war?

So I say "hooray" Time Magazine and thank you for not putting Junior on your cover!

or just blair maybe

if they had chosen the person (or people) who had the most impact on the news of the year (which is Time's own criterion).

It should have been Saddam. Just like it should have been Osama Bin Laden in 2001, but they wimped out and chose Guliani (again, a reasonable choice -- and not Bush -- but not the correct one).

If not for Osama in 2001, and Saddam today, the soldiers and Guliani would be working in relative quiet.

While the soldiers are much deserving of praise, the Person of the Year is not supposed to be an honor.

.

The men and women in the service of our country are the reason we are free. They sacrifice to protect us from enemies foreign and domestiic. They have my eternal thanks!

.

Assuming Time was around then, some people would have no problem with Time making the German army 'Person of the Year'.

After all they were only innocently following orders of the corrupt Nazi regieme.

this should spread more joy to what few allies we have left.