Letters

Person of the Year

"Too often we take for granted our freedoms and those who serve to protect them. Thank you for recognizing such deserving people."
DAVID EADIE
Fredericksburg, Va.

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 graphics >>
More photos >>

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

More Stories >>

CNN.com: Latest News

I have fond memories of my family's noisy, heated discussions about whom TIME would select as Person of the Year [Dec. 29--Jan. 5]. Whoever guessed right had bragging rights for the next year. I applaud your wonderful choice of the American soldier. These men and women most likely did not expect to go to war when they signed up, yet there they are, day after day, doing their job, fighting for freedom. They deserve our thanks, support, accolades and prayers.
FRANCINE M. SCUDERI
Stewart Manor, N.Y.

The designation of the American soldier as Person of the Year brought a lump to this old soldier's throat and is a fitting tribute to today's generation. These young people have proved that we old veterans can now relax, knowing that the task of defending America is in good hands. I suspect the selection was a very difficult one, as so many newsmakers, good and bad, were in contention. May I congratulate your staff for a truly spectacular choice!
RICHARD BROWN, U.S. ARMY (RET.)
Springfield, Mo.

I'm sure you made your choice with the best intentions. I am worried, however, that it reflects a country too much in love with its own military might. The U.S.'s armed forces are an extension of American foreign policy, not the savior of the world. To start thinking of service members as infallible crusaders for freedom is delusional and dangerous to the rest of the world. Let's remember what our military really is: a group of Americans sworn to defend the freedom of the U.S. and its Constitution. They are not the U.N.'s Blue Helmets, dedicated to keeping peace around the globe.
LANCE CPL. PAUL METCALF, U.S.M.C.
Okinawa

I was extremely upset by TIME's selection. While you were right to point out the bravery and courage of U.S. soldiers, you ignored the armed forces from other nations that are fighting alongside the Americans. George W. Bush and Tony Blair are trying to portray the Iraq conflict as one fought by the international community against evil and tyranny. TIME needs to provide an explanation to the families of Italian, Spanish, British and Polish soldiers who have fought and died in Iraq. Why weren't their lives and sacrifices recognized as noble and noteworthy like those of Americans?
MAREK WITKO
London

I was overcome with pride and emotion by your selection. At age 22, my son is, like countless others, a "war veteran." He has served twice in Afghanistan and is preparing for deployment to Iraq. I'm grateful to TIME for looking past the glitter and gloss of celebrities to say "Thank you" to our true American heroes.
BEVERLY D. GENDA
Greenville, N.C.

Although I feel great sympathy and even a certain admiration for what the U.S. military is doing in Iraq, the choice of the American soldier as Person of the Year was extremely disappointing to me. It is sad to select a symbol of man's continuing and predictable stupidity. If a great and powerful nation like the U.S. cannot find a more compassionate and creative way to deal with international discord, we are all doomed.
FRANCOIS HEBERT
Montreal

As a German who grew up after World War II, I have always regarded any glorification of the military with skepticism and suspicion. Despite knowing how much Germans owe to the Allied forces that liberated us from Nazi terror, and acknowledging that the majority of Iraqis rejoice that they are rid of Saddam Hussein because of the efforts of American and coalition troops, I wish that others would not forget that an army uses force and violence. Innocent people have always suffered in wartime, no matter what the motives of the military.
ECKHARD KORFF
Lippborg, Germany

Some argued that Osama Bin Laden should have been 2001's Person of the Year, but I understood TIME's wish to choose an inspirational figure like New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani after the horrific attacks of 9/11. In 2003, however, one person dominated the media on an almost daily basis for an entire year, culminating with his capture fully covered by the world's press. The Person of the Year should have been Saddam Hussein.
ROHIN FRANCIS
London

TIME's selection was understandable. To many, the U.S. warrior is the epitome of patriotism and a manifestation of selfless commitment to the defense of the homeland. But the same can be said of the troops of all countries. Unfortunately, the revered image of American soldiers has become tarnished over the decades. Their deployment in Iraq has given them the character of the Roman legions sent forth by a decadent and malevolent Emperor. The U.S. soldier is a pawn in a war that is not only unpopular but also wrong.
ALEX KETTLE
Bundaberg, Australia

By choosing the American soldier, TIME insulted non-Americans. The war in Iraq was illegal, fought by service members who would have done well to object to the U.S.'s invasion by refusing to fight, much like those who resisted the draft during the Vietnam War. Instead, the troops marched into a sovereign country under a false pretext, only to learn that the people they liberated wanted the occupiers out at any cost. TIME should not demean the sensibilities of the rest of the world by glorifying the wrongs of a nation and its people.
JAGDEEP PARSRAM
Bombay