Time names US soldiers People of the Year

From Yahoo/AP

An excellent and not very political choice if you think about it.

Excellent choice.

I have a cousin over there and things like this make a huge difference to our soldiers, according to him.

I think it is a bad choice. Not that our fighting men and women do not deserve it, but that Time is giving another cop-out. It is like naming the City of New York in 2001. It should have been UBL in 2001 and Saddam this year.

It is like naming the City of New York in 2001. It should have been UBL in 2001 and Saddam this year.

I can see UBL, but other than say ""Nope, no WMD''s"" and disappear from sight, what did Saddam do this year?

"ralcydan" wrote:
It is like naming the City of New York in 2001. It should have been UBL in 2001 and Saddam this year.

I can see UBL, but other than say ""Nope, no WMD''s"" and disappear from sight, what did Saddam do this year?

Caused us to go to war.

"Rat Boy" wrote:

An excellent and not very political choice if you think about it.

An excellent choice, I agree (though quite honestly the whole Man/Woman/People/Lunchmeat of the Year thing is trite).

Politically, it''s also a very safe choice. Count the number of politicians (regardless of political affiliation) which have robotically mouthed the words ""I support the troops"".

Even Dean has said words to that effect, and he has (in my opinion) very little in common with the average soldier.

I''m very surprised Time copped-out and didn''t award it to Bush. I mean, I think it''s a touching tribute to the soldiers, but at the same time love him or hate him, Bush has been at the forefront of world opinion, diplomacy, conflict, and news all year. I figured he had it locked.

I''m very surprised Time copped-out and didn''t award it to Bush. I mean, I think it''s a touching tribute to the soldiers, but at the same time love him or hate him, Bush has been at the forefront of world opinion, diplomacy, conflict, and news all year. I figured he had it locked.

I agree, I mean they gave it to Hitler - so giving it to Bush should even sit well with the ""Bush is Hitler"" crowd.

See, everybody would have been happy!

But if the ""Bush is Hitler"" crowd is right they would give it to the same man twice! That would be pretty cheap, so they had to choose another one.

EDIT: Spelling (where''s my coffee)

I think a lot of attention has been given to soldiers and it''s not a cop out. We followed them during the Iraq war, and hear how many die or get wounded each day. They should have gotten it in 1943 as well, oh well.

I''ll tell you when Time copped out. When they named the Computer the man of the year. That was lame. I''m waiting for when they turn it into the Person of the Year and ultimately, the News Item of the Year.

If you chose the most influential person each year it would always be the American President, the most powerful person of the world.

By the way, has a German other than Hitler ever made Time Magazine''s man of the year? Did Einstein or Golda Meir? I''m just curious.

Technically, wasn''t Hitler Austrian?

indeed. Worst. Import. Ever.

So it only took one foreigner to take over Germany? I thought France was bad.

Well at least Hitler had some opposition in Germany. That, plus the fact that productivity didn''t skyrocket once the Nazi party took control.

That, plus the fact that productivity didn''t skyrocket once the Nazi party took control.

Just more evidence that socialism doesn''t work...

""Bush is Hitler"", that''s so funny.

Bush is just a muppet, the people behind him are the problem.

bin Laden should have gotten it for 2001. He is, without question, one of the most influential men this century.

Bush is Hirohito.

Do me a favor Dirt, try to contribute a little more than one liners.

Please delete my posts.

Is Time''s ""Man of the Year"" supposed to be a worldwide thing, or only valid for the US?

I bought the issue, and it''s actually pretty good, nice stories from soldiers. I agree with Elysium - Bush should have been it. And Osama, back in 2001 - that was a total cop-out. Saddam? Who cares.

I loved the Today interview about this. Katie Couric is such an idiot.

Katie Couric: "Time magazine's Person of the Year issue hits news stands today and this year it honors the American soldier. Jim Kelly is Time's Managing Editor and veteran war photographer James Nachtwey was embedded with the Army's First Armored Division in Baghdad and took the remarkable images in this week's issue, he was also wounded while on assignment. Gentlemen, welcome, good morning, nice to have you both. I was so, I have to say, just personally, I was so pleased to see this....Tell me why you all decided to honor the American soldier? Wondering why there's no woman on the cover, too?"
Time's Jim Kelly, pointing to cover: "This is a woman."
Couric: "Oh, there you go, oh sorry....I couldn't tell because of her helmet."