Skip Nav
Valentine's Day
Valentine's Day Lingerie For 13 Types of Couples
Celebrity Interviews
The Bachelor's Sean and Catherine Lowe Dish Sweet Details on Their Baby-to-Be
Women
Single Ladies! Be Bold and Take Our 30-Day Challenge

Time Cover Showing Iwo Jima

Do You Think This Time Cover Disrespects Veterans?

Controversy is raging over the image on this week's cover of Time magazine. It shows that famous picture of soldiers raising the flag over Iwo Jima, but in the place of the flag, is a tree. Earth Day is this week, but co-opting this famous image in the name of ecology has made some veterans livid.

"I am a Marine, 82 years old that landed on Iwo Jima Feb. 19, 1945. This crap you have on your magazine – you can put it where the sun does not shine."

Another Marine, the man who led the platoon that actually raised the flag on Iwo Jima addresses the crux of the cover saying, "global warming is the biggest joke I've ever known."

Forced to address the backlash, the associate director of public relations for Time certainly sees it differently:

TIME has the utmost respect for our nation’s veterans and we well understand the power of the iconic image of the raising of the flag over Iwo Jima. We believe this is a respectful use of this symbol of American valor and courage and serves to highlight another great challenge facing our nation.

I asked my grandfather, whom I consider my go-to expert for all matters of the military and patriotism and he said, "It's not that they were disrespectful of the image or the event, it's that those men didn't get a say whether they wanted their likenesses from that moment in time, used for another purpose other than its original meaning."

What do you think? Is the cover just a creative way to take an iconic struggle and assign it modern meaning? Or is Time way out of line?

Around The Web
How to Save Money on Organic Food
How to Keep Lemons Fresh Longer
DIY Cleaning Products
Cleaning in the Dishwasher

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
yesteryear yesteryear 7 years
hartsfull: i think potc totally understands and his/her comment sums it up nicely. and the comments thus far have not given one sound reason this is offensive - at least one that's not based on an emotional response to the image rather than a critical look at the message. if it was the cover of cosmo and the soldiers were pulling up a gigantic dildo and the headline was "give yourself more orgasms" i could see how this would be offensive... but it's not. it's a tribute more than anything else.
hartsfull hartsfull 7 years
Potc, If you really don't understand, please go back to the first comment and read from there. Very good points have been made.
potc-crazyy potc-crazyy 7 years
All right. I honestly can't see how it's offensive. Maybe it was a bit rude of time to not notify them that the photo was going to be used--- but it IS public domain. But really--- I see the message of this photo as, "We can defeat our climate crisis just like our victory in WWII". What's so wrong about that? I don't see why a veteran would be offended, unless they don't believe in global warming. This is showing the soldiers in a good light, saying "They helped 'save the world.' We need to do it again." ... right? MissyCat... how is it offensive? I'm just really curious--- honestly!
yesteryear yesteryear 7 years
i really wish i hadn't been in meetings all day and had been able to point out the many flaws in the arguments against the "concept" that humans created global warming. thank god hypnoticmix was around to be brilliant. seriously. if you want to bury your head in the sand and continue believing that as long as we aren't wholly to blame we shouldn't waste any money devising a plan to reverse the damage that's already been done, then go ahead. but it's nothing compared to what we're spending on the war - so while you're arguing against research that could possibly save the entire planet, i hope you're also fighting against the trillions of dollars we're spending to run a country called iraq into the ground.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 7 years
Harmony: Hmmm..."work"...what is this concept of which you speak? (Me, too!)
harmonyfrance harmonyfrance 7 years
:ROTFL: hypno AND thanks everyone who congratulated me on going gold. I got pulled away. I had to "work"
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Yes I watched that brilliant show. I was blown away at how many cell phones get tossed in the U.K. in one month alone. Imagine the number in the U.S.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 7 years
hypnotic: Very nice logic in 109, I bow to you. And while I love to pester people by throwing curve balls, this was not one of those instances. However, as mere humans, our idea of how to best survive is very limited in scope compared to big climatic cycles and the lifespan of the earth. Everything alive impacts the environment. Our best approach can only be to do so in as balanced and careful a manner as possible. There was a great show on BBC-America a few weeks ago called "Dumped". They took a busload of volunteers (without telling them the destination) and dropped them off at a landfill. They had to survive using stuff they salvaged (except for things like food, of course). Did anyone else see it? Very enlightening!
MissyCat MissyCat 7 years
As a military veteran, I find it insulting. Period.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 7 years
wackdoodle: There *is* opposition. Here are three instances I found without looking too hard. I chose them because they are very different kinds of sources, but not just opinion blogs. From the CATO Institute. Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html Here's one item, citing specific instances. It's not a formal news outlet, but cites sources, and is objective and factual. www.rense.com/general75/oppo.htm This one looked interesting, I have heard similar comments but want to read this article more thoroughly. "Global Warming as Religion and not Science" www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htm Professor John Brignell (Professor Emeritus (ESD)) "He...dedicates a considerable amount of his time to editing a web site called Number Watch at http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/ which deals with wrong numbers in the media and politics...."
hartsfull hartsfull 7 years
I am way behind in comments guys. Bear with me, pleeeeeaase!
hartsfull hartsfull 7 years
Wackdoodle, That's incorrect. He took several pictures. The one where they are putting up the flag, he thought didn't take. I can't remember why. Anyway, they then did a "posed" picture but the flag was already up. When the editor (I think it was the editor) asked him if he had them pose for that, he thought he was asking about the posed picture. He said, "yes". He didn't know that the one where they were putting up the flag actually came out.
hartsfull hartsfull 7 years
Wackdoodle, That's incorrect. He took several pictures. The one where they are putting up the flag, he thought didn't take. I can't remember why. Anyway, they then did a "posed" picture but the flag was already up. When the editor (I think it was the editor) asked him if he had them pose for that, he thought he was asking about the posed picture. He said, "yes". He didn't know that the one where they were putting up the flag actually came out.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Once in a blue moon my dear...once in a blue moon.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Nice curve ball Lainetm, but living green isn't interfering with the natural process it's interfering with our unnatural man made process of doing things. To answer your question directly if a natural process truly posed a threat to society on a continental or global level the instinct to survive (which is natural) would be appropriate and I am sure that in our diligence to save our very existence we won't destroy the world completely knowing that yes we do still have to live on it.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Nice curve ball Lainetm, but living green isn't interfering with the natural process it's interfering with our unnatural man made process of doing things.To answer your question directly if a natural process truly posed a threat to society on a continental or global level the instinct to survive (which is natural) would be appropriate and I am sure that in our diligence to save our very existence we won't destroy the world completely knowing that yes we do still have to live on it.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 7 years
There is enough opposition to "conventional" global warming theories to make them fairly easy to find with a quick google search. I did find one interesting article, though. It's old--from 2000--but has more concrete data than I often find. Besides, this is (or so they say) an old issue, anyway, so that shouldn't matter much. www.oism.org/news/s49p1083.htm Just for the record, I'm not a gross consumer, we try to be sensible, recycle, etc. It's good to be environmentally conscious. However, these folks with quick, short-term solutions to *perceived* problems, who don't take the time to study and analyze, only make things worse. I'm always for making changes carefully and thoughtfully, just as a good work habit.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 7 years
There is enough opposition to "conventional" global warming theories to make them fairly easy to find with a quick google search. I did find one interesting article, though. It's old--from 2000--but has more concrete data than I often find. Besides, this is (or so they say) an old issue, anyway, so that shouldn't matter much. www.oism.org/news/s49p1083.htm Just for the record, I'm not a gross consumer, we try to be sensible, recycle, etc. It's good to be environmentally conscious. However, these folks with quick, short-term solutions to *perceived* problems, who don't take the time to study and analyze, only make things worse. I'm always for making changes carefully and thoughtfully, just as a good work habit.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
haha syako we should make a documentary consisting entirely of emoticons.
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
hypno i didn't know you liked to be on the receiving end ;)
wackdoodle wackdoodle 7 years
The photo is property of the US government and the US people and is public domain. And there is no question in the science community that Global Climate Change is in effect and speeding up do to humans. What is in dispute is how to go about slowing it or whether its possible to stop it and reverse it within the next 50 to 100 years before it becomes irreversible.
wackdoodle wackdoodle 7 years
The photo is property of the US government and the US people and is public domain.And there is no question in the science community that Global Climate Change is in effect and speeding up do to humans. What is in dispute is how to go about slowing it or whether its possible to stop it and reverse it within the next 50 to 100 years before it becomes irreversible.
syako syako 7 years
I judge a little too cab ;)
syako syako 7 years
I judge a little too cab ;)
syako syako 7 years
let's make a pirate documentary using only computer generated images :yaar:
Latest Love
X