Letters

Sunday, Jan. 11, 2004
    • Person of the Year

    "Not only do the men and women who serve in all branches of the military deserve our respect and support, their survival demands it."
    JAMES M. WHITE
    Tucson, Ariz.


    LATEST COVER STORY
    Mind & Body Happiness
    Jan. 17, 2004
     

    SPECIAL REPORTS
     Coolest Video Games 2004
     Coolest Inventions
     Wireless Society
     Cool Tech 2004

    PHOTOS AND GRAPHICS
     At The Epicenter
     Paths to Pleasure
     Quotes of the Week
     This Week's Gadget
     Cartoons of the Week

    MORE STORIES
    Advisor: Rove Warrior
    The Bushes: Family Dynasty
    Klein: Benneton Ad Presidency

    CNN.com: Latest News

    TIME's choice for Person Of The Year [Dec. 29--Jan. 5] was like a holiday present from you to those of us who have loved ones guarding freedom around the world. My son is serving in Afghanistan, and along with many other soldiers, he spent Christmas away from home for the first time. Thank you for a brilliant choice!
    CONSTANCE STEWART
    Holliston, Mass.

    The American soldier was an appropriate selection, yet there was no mention of the coalition soldiers from other nations whose lives have been sacrificed in Iraq. I do not want to sound churlish, but without the help of the armed forces from numerous other countries, the task of overthrowing Saddam Hussein would have been considerably tougher.
    BYRON NICHOLLS
    Scunthorpe, England

    Whether the war is right or wrong, those in the armed forces are risking their lives, not only for the countries where they serve but also to defend all of us at home. TIME's report was the best description I have read anywhere of what our feelings should be in response to the sacrifices of those in the services.
    SUSAN LUITJENS
    Columbus, Ga.

    Bravo for honoring the heroes of the year! There may be differing opinions about whether the troops should be where they are, but there is no disputing that they deserve the utmost respect and admiration for being willing to serve and protect us. We must not only be grateful but also let the people in the services know how appreciative we are. Thanks for doing your part.
    VICTORIA S. HUTCHINSON
    Lynchburg, Ohio

    Anywhere you go outside the U.S., the American soldier is seen as the embodiment of a power-hungry regime intent on world domination. TIME's selection reflects America's desire to feel that its bloody and violent occupation of Iraq is somehow doing good.
    STEVE NEUMANN
    London

    Whether or not one agrees with what George W. Bush has done, it is beyond belief that TIME did not select him as Person of the Year. He was clearly the dominant influence on world events during 2003. Our fighting men and women deserve a tremendous amount of respect and admiration, but who made the decision to deploy them?
    MARK NEWTON
    Scottsdale, Ariz.

    The Year in Pictures

    Among "The Best Photos Of The Year"--most of which depicted war, disaster and death — was the hospital photo of Ali Ismail, the little boy who lost both arms in the destruction of his home near Baghdad [Dec. 22]. But you also included a small picture showing him as he is now. It was very moving and gave me so much hope. TIME can be very proud to have played a role in helping generate the donations that led to restoring Ali's health and providing him with rehabilitation and an education. His improved condition and his prospects for a dignified future will be forever linked to Yuri Kozyrev's poignant photo taken just after Ali had been so cruelly wounded.
    ODE LAFORGE
    Fontenilles, France

    James Hill's picture of a dead Iraqi soldier lying on the ground as a U.S. troop convoy passed by was in your selection of the year's best photos. While that photo conveys the horrific reality of the war, it is unbelievable that TIME would publish a picture of a dead Iraqi soldier and not also show dead American soldiers. Are Iraqis any less human than Americans? I wish the U.S. media, especially TIME, would show the same respect for all human beings and not run any photos of dead soldiers.
    KATHERINE J. HARRISON
    Silver Spring, Md.

    The Tactical Memo

    In "How To Lose Friends And Alienate People" [Dec. 22], Michael Elliott wrote about Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz's memo stipulating that only firms from coalition-force countries can win prime contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. By having Wolfowitz sign and release this memo, President Bush was ensuring the continued loyalty of those in the Republican Party who subscribe to a unilateralist foreign policy. Having secured this support, Bush can now occupy the middle ground. The political nuances at play here are highly sophisticated. The President is always discounted as a political neophyte, but in truth he is extremely clever.
    ANDREAS STAVROPOULOS
    Scarborough, Ont.

    Elliott was wrong in arguing that Wolfowitz's memo would cause a diplomatic row just before presidential envoy James Baker III visited Europe on a mission to reduce Iraq's debt to other countries. The memo was clearly a hardball negotiating tactic. Faced with this threat, France and Germany finally relented and agreed to forgive some of Iraq's debt. In the end, the U.S. will reconsider the policy on contracts in Iraq. Apparently, Elliott knows nothing of real-world negotiations.
    MORGAN CONRAD
    Montara, Calif.

    The countries that are being permitted to participate in the bids for contracts in Iraq suffered right alongside the U.S., whether through offering the lives of their soldiers or millions from their treasuries, or by simply withstanding public ridicule for supporting the cause of freedom in Iraq. The message to those countries that did not is simple: You cannot oppose us and then expect to reap the rewards of our sacrifice.
    JAY DAVID TURNER
    San Diego

    2. Previous Page
    3. 1
    4. 2