Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saving Iraqi baby a new mission for U.S. troops
CNN ^ | 12/28/2005 | CNN

Posted on 12/28/2005 2:42:15 PM PST by SueRae

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- When troops from the Georgia National Guard raided a Baghdad home in early December, they had no idea that their mission in Iraq would take a different turn.

As the young parents of an infant girl nervously watched the soldiers search their modest home, the baby's unflinching grandmother thrust the little girl at the Americans, showing them the purple pouch protruding from her back.

Little Noor, barely three months old, was born with spina bifida, a birth defect in which the spinal column fails to completely close. Iraqi doctors had told her parents she would live only 45 days.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: babynoor; iraq; iraqichildren
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last
To: Vn_survivor_67-68
so very few Guard or reserve UNITS went there

I infer that by using CAPS in UNITS, you are trying to emphasize that even though Guard personnel served in Vietnam, they typically didn't serve in intact Guard units. And that may be the reason for what I am seeing. Am I right?

What is the reason Guard personnel remain in intact units today instead of being dispersed like Vietnam?

21 posted on 12/28/2005 3:19:28 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide

like I SAID, we had the draft back then and no shortage of personnel or active-duty units! damn....


22 posted on 12/28/2005 3:21:16 PM PST by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SueRae

Say a prayer that the Visas get through in time. I have a six month old (healthy, thank God), so a story like this really pulls at my heart strings.


23 posted on 12/28/2005 3:21:36 PM PST by knpriestap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
like I SAID, we had the draft back then and no shortage of personnel or active-duty units! damn....

OK. You had not asserted that there is a shortage of personnel in active-duty units today although you had stated that there was no shortage of personnel in Vietnam. I was unaware that active-duty units today had a shortage of personnel to that degree.

24 posted on 12/28/2005 3:27:02 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
What is the reason Guard personnel remain in intact units today instead of being dispersed like Vietnam?

There were Guards units who went to VN as units.

Twenty Army National Guard units from 17 states were mobilized for service in the Vietnam War on May 13, 1968. Company D (Ranger) of the 151st Infantry, Indiana Army National Guard arrived in the country in December of that year......

National Guard

25 posted on 12/28/2005 3:27:58 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide

sorry, I had given you credit for knowing the reason for the existence of the Reserves and Nat'l Guard.


26 posted on 12/28/2005 3:29:39 PM PST by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: doodad
Just like the bit on the non-landmines/smart mines in which you opined on the 80 mile proximity.

We're not supposed to cross-thread these things, but it is important for me to assert that I did not bring up the topic of Mexico or Mexicans on that thread. I opposed someone else's proposal that we use landmines to target Mexicans.

27 posted on 12/28/2005 3:31:12 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide

"... it is important for me to assert..."

NOW I get it, LOL


28 posted on 12/28/2005 3:36:14 PM PST by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber; Vn_survivor_67-68
Twenty Army National Guard units from 17 states were mobilized for service in the Vietnam War on May 13, 1968.

That is more consistent with my memory. I find it interesting that the Guard units you evidence were all activated on the same day. I take it that you are in no way suggesting that these were the only Guard units activated for service in Vietnam.

29 posted on 12/28/2005 3:38:26 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
42 Army Reserve units were also activated during the period, not to mention thousands of IRR troops.

I read it as though you believed no units were deployed.

30 posted on 12/28/2005 3:44:39 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber

I was relying on misleading information from Vn_survivor_67-68 regarding the Guard in Vietnam. I had wondered why this article identifies the Georgia National Guard in Iraq as opposed to the US Army. I do not recall the media making the distinction between Guard and active units in Vietnam.

I suggested that CNN is trying to influence my view on the war. Vn_survivor_67-68 said that the number of units mobilized during Vietnam was insignificant and that Guard members typically served in active duty units.


31 posted on 12/28/2005 3:50:52 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
But a lot of Freepers would be mad if little Noor were a Mexican

Why?
First off, this isn't a story of someone here illegally, if that's what you're getting at. Even if this were for instance the case of an anchor baby, I don't think anyone would begrudge a baby a life-saving operation.
Or are you simply taking any opportunity to make a snide remark about FReepers? Are you the super-special-always-right FReeper?
32 posted on 12/28/2005 3:55:11 PM PST by visualops (www.visualops.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
had wondered why this article identifies the Georgia National Guard in Iraq as opposed to the US Army. I do not recall the media making the distinction between Guard and active units in Vietnam.

I suggested that CNN is trying to influence my view on the war

Maybe, since CNN is based in Atlanta, they were doing a "hometown piece" on the GA troops.

Sometimes, there are no ulterior motives.

33 posted on 12/28/2005 4:03:15 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
We're not supposed to cross-thread these things

But.. But.. you did on this thread. That is my complaint along with the land mine like post.

34 posted on 12/28/2005 4:12:28 PM PST by doodad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
I had wondered why this article identifies the Georgia National Guard in Iraq as opposed to the US Army

Because that fits the plan of the media of showing non volunteer status since they don't have the draft. "Hey man, I just joined for the money and education." Part time, part time man. Without understanding the role and goal of the Guard in maintaining a standing army.

35 posted on 12/28/2005 4:19:34 PM PST by doodad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: doodad
But.. But.. you did on this thread. That is my complaint along with the land mine like post.

I only made a reference to the other thread in response to you. You had left the impression that I had brought up Mexico on the land mine thread which is objectively false. The only reason I mentioned the other thread is to set the record straight. For some reason, it appears you still think I brought up Mexico on the land mine thread.

36 posted on 12/28/2005 4:23:54 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: doodad
Because that fits the plan of the media of showing non volunteer status since they don't have the draft. "Hey man, I just joined for the money and education." Part time, part time man.

That was my impression, too. It seems that we're the only ones to think that.

37 posted on 12/28/2005 4:25:11 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
There you go again. Whatever. Here was your first post on this thread that had nothing to do remotely or even in the same hemisphere as Mexico

But a lot of Freepers would be mad if little Noor were a Mexican

As far as the other thread, the point was that your asinine "proximity to the border" argument was a red herring. Sheesh and good night.

38 posted on 12/28/2005 4:31:26 PM PST by doodad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
I have seen many shows on tv about Latin America children coming here for treatment. One story was about conjoined twins who were brought here to be separated. Why bring up this in a nice story?
39 posted on 12/28/2005 4:33:54 PM PST by MamaB (mom to an Angel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: doodad
As far as the other thread, the point was that your asinine "proximity to the border" argument was a red herring. Sheesh and good night.

I do believe that parents of exploring kids 8-14 would not want a mine field anywhere near them. People who live 80 miles from the mine field may not care, but people living close would. I think the proximity to the mine field/border is important. We disagree on that.

Good night.

40 posted on 12/28/2005 4:36:47 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson