G.W. Bush is the worst president the US ever has had, and he may be a worse president of Iraq even than Saddam.

They can put their lives at risk by translating for the Americans in order to get the hell out of there? The situation is endlessly shameful.

The most disturbing thing about these stories is how familiar they seem; I feel like I've read the same reports before, written instead about women in Iran and Afghanistan. Once again, a Western power has blundered into the Islamic world looking to bring its favorite flavor of Western enlightenment (be it capitalism or communism), and has planted instead the seeds of a conservative religious revival that strips half the population of their rights, and hamstrings a society in an already-tenuous position by pushing educated, capable people out of the picture. It seems that there are a lot of influential people out there who persist in believing, despite all evidence to the contrary, that rigging elections and landing tanks in people's backyards will eventually create sympathy for Western values, instead of scaring people right into the arms of the most conservative and firebrand varieties of Islam. When people feel threatened and insecure, they fall back on what seems familiar and decisive. In developing societies that have been starved of other forms of civil discourse, this is almost always going to be religious extremism.

When the salad days were under Saddam.

Nasty looks and obscene remarks from strangers because they're ay-rabs, discrimination at every turn, strip-searches any time they try to get on a plane ...

If Iraq is so bad for these young women that "Die, Muslims, Die" Amerika looks good to them, then Iraq is much, much worse than we imagined.

Because it is the worst thing ever to happen to the universe, ever.

Inta ibni-shaitan wi ibni-kalb. Faahimt?

Think she could have VOTED under Saddam? Think she could have gone to school under Saddam?

And why is she afraid to go out dressed in a shirt and blue jeans? Because of the Muslim clerics gangs that go around terrorizing them.

Think they weren't doing that BEFORE we invaded? Hell, they were doing that and worse.

Give me a break. You may or may not agree with the war, but don't try telling me things are worse for women now than they were before we went in.

Everything's comin' up grits and gravy in Iraq today.

Klytus,

"Everything's comin' up grits and gravy in Iraq today."

Have you been to either Afghanistan or Iraq?

Under Saddam, Iraqi women could, and did, dress how they pleased; they could, and did, go to school; and religious militias could not, and did not, enforce sharia law on the general populace. These are facts, not opinions, and well-documented. If the reality conflicts with your chosen propaganda, that's your problem.

Anna, Anna, Anna!

So, Iraqi women bemoan that they missed a few years of college and weddings are now over by 9 PM?

I wonder if they also miss Saddam's rape rooms, beheadings and gassings?

And what about those two devil-may-care sons of his, Uday and Qusay? Those fun-lovers were well known for their human shredders, aka, wood chippers with which they demonstrated why death was preferable to torture. On slow days, they would have the victim lowered into the shredder feet first so they could enjoy their slow death. When the boys had pressing engagements, they'd order quickies, head-first executions.

And speaking of weddings, do Iraqi women miss that other hobby of the boys, you know, weddings? Not that they attended those weddings, but if they saw a bride they fancied, they were wont to save the groom the task of bedding a virgin bride by whisking the young thang away and obviating the sometimes messy chore of being her Numero Uno.

I'm sure the grooms were appreciative, regardless of the prize that is virginity, especially in the Mid East.

Ms. Badhken should be reminded that when writing revisionist history certain very relevant details should never be ignored. Otherwise, she's writing base lies and distortions.

Ya Klytus - ana faahem. Shway shway, ok?

And Chief Payne - I was in Iraq in 1990, i.e. under Saddam. And it was a scary place to be but any threat I felt came from the government, who made very sure there was no threat from anyone else! City women did indeed wear jeans, t-shirts, etc. (not all women but many). And it was rare to see women all draped in black. Countrywomen wore traditional dress, but if they needed to kilt their skirts up to their knees while hoeing in the fields or if their braids came out from under their scarves, it was no big deal. And middle/upper class women certainly went to university and became doctors and teachers and occasionally engineers, etc. Things are definitely worse for women now than when I was there, wearing jeans, with my hair uncovered.

Under Saddam, women had to worry about the rape rooms, yes. Under the fundamentalist wackos whom Saddam kept in check, but the US war has unleashed, the entire country has become a rape room. As for torture, Iraqis don't need to secret police to do that any more -- because their friends and neighbors will do it for them.

wi salam.

Minfadlak...ruwah fi naar...okeey?

Kwais gidan.

the thinking would be more accurate: women didn't have freedom under saddam, they had privilege and license.

you have freedom when you have power.

when you don't have power, you may have privilege from those with power, or they may simply not care what you do. this is not freedom, as saddam can withhold what he has extended when he likes. so too can the masters of the militias now running the neighborhoods and villages of iraq.

to have real freedom, you must have power: membership in the ruling group. normally this ruling group is small, a few politicians, a few generals, a few plutocrats or corporation ceos.

for the general populace to have freedom, they must all participate in the exercise of power. this kind of society is called 'democracy'. there is only one: switzerland.

as long as you are content with privilege, you will be the servant of those whose favor you depend on. the american people are learning this lesson now, as the bush regime tears up the 'freedoms' of the constitution. i fear they are not getting the central point though, as the highest goal seems to be putting a different face on the throne.