Putin is 'Time' magazine's 'Man of the Year'

J

Jonny68

Active Member
Putin is 'Time' magazine's 'Man of the Year'
19/12/2007 - 13:34:07



Russian President Vladimir Putin was named 'Time' magazine’s “Person of the Year.”

The 2007 honour went to the Russian leader because of his “extraordinary feat of leadership in taking a country that was in chaos and bringing it stability,” said managing editor Richard Stengel.

Others in the running included Nobel Prize-winner Al Gore and author J.K. Rowling.

This year’s honour was a return to the magazine’s tradition of picking an individual rather than last year’s choice of anyone creating or using content on the internet.

Previous winners have included Bono, President George W. Bush and Amazon.com chief executive and founder Jeff Bezos.
 
Man of the year, your having a laugh :eek: what about the Russian Governments cover up over the murder of Alexander Litvenentko, and the one sided media coverage of elections,etc,etc i recently spoke to a Russian bloke and he said he despises Putin and told me some home truths about him and his Goverment,shameful, then again no one can take this ;award; seriously when past winners have included war criminals like George Bush and muppets like Bono.:rolleyes:

Interesting to hear what Morbyd thinks seen as he lives in Moscow.
 
man of the year doesnt have to be "nicest man of the year" although i dont know exactly what putins done to get the award.

wasn't osama bin laden up for man of the year a few years back as well after 9/11

think you are meant to look at it in that context jonny
 
fatphilb said:
man of the year doesnt have to be "nicest man of the year" although i dont know exactly what putins done to get the award.

wasn't osama bin laden up for man of the year a few years back as well after 9/11

think you are meant to look at it in that context jonny
Click to expand...

I don't think Bin laden was up for man of the year with Time Magazine anyway :eek::lol: how about instead of some currupt politican like Putin they give it to some normal joe soap or someone not already famous who has done something of real importance like voluntarily helping out in a Tsunami or something along those lines.
 
Jonny68 said:
I don't think Bin laden was up for man of the year with Time Magazine anyway :eek::lol: how about instead of some currupt politican like Putin they give it to some normal joe soap or someone not already famous who has done something of real importance like voluntarily helping out in a Tsunami or something along those lines.
Click to expand...

Because someone not really famous or a 'normal joe soap' is not going to have had the impact on world politics that Putin has.

It's simply about impact - not doing good. They have the Daily Mirror awards for that.
 
For the record,Bin Laden was a candidate a few years ago.

As for Putin, you do have to give him props for bringing stability back to Russia. Yes, press freedom is limited. Yes, there is still corruption (though much less than under Yeltsin). Yes, he's done some things to scare the bejesus out of the West.

But, looking at it from the other side, the vast majority of Russians support him. What's viewed in the West as insolance is viewed domestically as taking a stand. Sometimes, he's right. Sometimes, he's wrong but his positions on international issues take into account the Russian point of view which Western politicians have, for the past 15 years, appeared to take far too lightly.

The influence the Soviet Union had due to bombs has been replaced by a Russia with influence based on economic power. I'd take the latter over the former any day.

The West needs to learn to deal with Russia as a partner & equal, not as a backwards whipping boy. I'm not saying Russia is equal in all ways, but it is important and the people's mentality is such that they don't like being talked down to. Putin personifies this, and for that he deserves respect.

I don't think, as a Westerner, it's right to view him as a bad actor on the world stage. He's certainly not an angel either. But you can't deny that Russia is better off now than it was 8 years ago. In the long run, that's better for everyone.
 
Oh, and about Litvenenko. Whoever ordered the hit, Putin (and Medvedev if he succeeds him next spring) has no choice on extraditing the suspect Lugovoi. The Russian constitution forbids extraditing a citizen.

And that's not to mention the 30 wanted Russians living under asylum in the UK... sure, some of them might be politically persecuted, but that can't be true for all of them...
 
So let me get this straight what people are saying that OSAMA BIN LADEN the man responsible for 9/11 was nominated for "man of the year" in Time Magazine, seriously :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
 
I have just seen a small piece about this on the news. The award (if considered such) is about the biggest influence over the year. For example the computer won the award one year.

There can be little doubt that Osama Bin Laden changed the world forever.
 
Morbyd said:
Exactly... in the end, they gave it to Rudy Giuliani that year. I personally think they were afraid of the backlash.
Click to expand...

agreed

when you look at the award in the correct context there is no doubt that bin laden is one of the "men of the decade"

thats the reality
 
ED CASE said:
Its not about popularity, its about global impact
Click to expand...


That maybe so but man of the year sounds to most people like some type of award given,im absolutely flabbergasted someone like Osama Bin Laden was nominated and that there wasn't a massive backlash against Time Magazine over this.:eek:
 
i think had they made him man of the year, there would have been, although i think he had had the biggest impact, i dont think any publication would have the balls to do that.

why would there be backlash against a nomination? they're just objectively covering news events. it didnt offend me.
 
fatphilb said:
i think had they made him man of the year, there would have been, although i think he had had the biggest impact, i dont think any publication would have the balls to do that.

why would there be backlash against a nomination? they're just objectively covering news events. it didnt offend me.
Click to expand...


Well it might not offend you but im sure people who lost loved ones in 9/11 would be absolutely horrified over this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top