4/7/2003: U.S. Navy Corpsman delivers Iraqi child

The shot above is a little misleading; that isn't the guy who actually delivered the baby, he's the Chief Hospital Corpsman. But the image and story are great anyway: more humanity in the face of inhumanity, of which I can't get enough.

Last Wednesday morning, a displaced Iraqi family approached the 15th Expeditionary Unit of the Marines. It was shortly after sunrise. The young Iraqi woman, Jamila Katham, was about to deliver. They rushed her to the nearest Battalion Aid Station, and 15 minutes later a baby girl was born, with the assistance of Navy Lt. Sean Stroup who is the battalion's surgeon.

The above photo got circulated. In it, the infant is about two hours old. By now the family has been transferred to safer medical facilities. And the girl has a name: "Rogenia". Everyone is doing fine.

story
source of image

Awww........


Wierd that kid is never going know who Sadam was, all he'll know is what people tell him.

hm

If the baby is a few hours old, why aren't the parents holding the baby?

Imagine the courage it must have taken for someone to take their pregnant wife, in labor, to an invading army for medical assistance. They could very well have been shot!

Another one:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/columnists/tonyparsons/ (link will expire)

Tony Parsons, one of the only pro-war columnists in the UK:

"I felt pride when I read about Sergeant Gary Hughes, who picked up and carried an Iraqi woman who was giving birth to a hospital in Az Zubayr.

"There is now a baby boy in Southern Iraq who rejoices in the name of Yussuf Gary."

From the same column, Juju:

"Former United Nations worker Vanessa Lough says that over the past two weeks children as young as four have been snatched from their parents and hung from lampposts or burned alive in southern Iraq. Scores of children have been executed as a way of punishing their parents.

"One man had committed the terrible crime of laughing with British soldiers. They (Ba'ath party goons) told him he had betrayed Saddam in an act of treason, says the former UN worker, who now works as an interpreter for aid organisations.

"He received a broken leg and a severe beating. The men made the father watch as they set his son alight with petrol."

Yeah, given a choice, I would go to the invaders.

Here's a thought. If the anti war people say we shouldn't interfere with Saddam's treatment of his subjects, does that make them racist?

Re: hm

Quote:

Originally posted by Taoist If the baby is a few hours old, why aren't the parents holding the baby?

Re: Re: hm

OK. If Saddam kills people out side his country it draws outrage, from someone. But, that same person doesn't get upset when Saddam kills his own people. Does that make that person a racist? More gooder?

Um. No.

Racism is judging somebody by their race, their ethnicity.

What you're talking about is an issue of sovereignty and world affairs. What a government does within it's borders is judged differently than what it does beyond it's borders -- at least partially because, in our current world, that means that it's doing it within another country's borders, where another country has sovereignty and is responsible for and to it's citizens.

If the government of um... Zimbabwe kills a citizen of the United States, we would care much more than if the government of Zimbabwe killed a citizen of Zimbabwe. It is held to be different.

If the atrocities that have been committed in Iraq were committed in Canada or Australia, you can bet your ass we'd be pissed.

Throwing people in plastic shredders? Being shot in the head if the government even gets the slightest hint that you're displeased with it? Killing children? Torturing people on racks? Hanging them over vats of acid and slowly lowering them?

The only thing that causes people to not care is language and culture. They're alien to us, so they don't matter. Someone that speaks English, though, can communicate their thoughts, feelings, and experiences with you. They're human. And knowing someone makes you care more about them.

The checks and balances in all our constitutions precludes the likelihood of similar atrocities being wrought upon our respective citizens- thank forefathers!

For me, grasping the concept of forfeiting my mortal wellbeing in exchange for the 'promise' of everlasting bliss is as incomprehensible as the idea of democracy seems to be for the aforementioned.
I'm uncertain whether the Iraqi people will have a damn clue what they should do with their new-found liberation, I just hope they appreciate their ability to choose

And in a predictable irony, this child grows up to be the next Islamic totalitarian dictator of the Middle East.