U.S. Objects to Saudi Description of Iraq As Occupied

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.aina.org/news/20070330084101.htm

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The United States on Thursday rejected Saudi King Abdullah's charge that Iraq is under an "illegitimate foreign occupation," and said U.S. troops were there at Iraq's invitation under a United Nations mandate.

"It is not accurate to say that the United States is occupying Iraq," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. snip

Perino said the United States and Saudi Arabia have a close and cooperative relationship but made it clear that the Bush administration did not agree with the king's statement.

"When it comes to the coalition forces being in Iraq, we are there under the U.N. Security Council resolutions and at the invitation of the Iraqi people," she said.

[paparush]

1. What the fuck else would you call it?

[thecrow]

7. Umm..... temporary immigration?

[bdamomma]

2. geez, these people are all liars and are delusional

Perino what is she drinking???? it's got to be stronger than kool aid that is for sure.

[AndyA]

3. Um, the Saudis would be correct in their description.

We invaded a sovereign nation that had done nothing to us.

They were not responsible for 9/11.

They did not/were not harboring terrorists.

They had no WMDs.

They were not aiding the terrorists in any way.

We had no reason to invade their country.

It is an illegitimate foreign occupation. It is what it is.

[saltpoint]

4. Looks quite a bit like an occupation to me.

And that promised day when the Iraqi populace throws roses at our occupying troops appears a long way off.

[htuttle]

5. We've been "invited" to stay the same way the Nazis were "invited" by the Vichy French government

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. Poor Dana. Caught telling the truth on her first day. Now

being forced to say the oddest things as though they were fact.
I feel for her. actually, if it weren't for her obvious deranged political beliefs, I would not mind feeling her, but never mind.

[NNN0LHI]

8. This is why Bush had the Saudis start this smoke and mirrors to begin with

The Republicans were getting tired of hearing the Dems call it an occupation. Now the Republicans can say "Oh, you agree with the Saudis, eh?" every time a Dem says it.

Don

[smaug]

12. Hmm. Sounds like

The Soviet occupation of eastern Europe from the 1940s to the 1990s. Remember east Germany (1953) and Hungary (1954)? The Iraqi occupation has the very same smell, and the same template: find some SOBs willing to sell anything for money (if that sounds familiar, think reTHUGlics), dress 'em up as the 'authorities,' fill 'em with the weasel words for asking for 'help' from the US, and then occupy.

Man, I've been marvelling how the ReTHUGlic and Xtianists COMPLETELY channel Stalin. Guess the Cold War did teach the Xtianists something; how to oppress in total repudiation to Christian values.

[PATRICK]

9. Saudis closing shop on Iran War?

is this one of the prime movers jumping ship, jumping aside, pretending to join the Muslim world, acting in moderate collaboration with Bush I to gently pull Junior back- or what? These are are all fascinating natural speculations you of course won't find in the media and the public story -more surprisingly- is accepted at face value among the "wise".

This is hardly one little disappointing rift between the WH and an "ally". It is a big maneuver and hardly one planned to help the Bush administration in its current messes. At the least it is the politically vulnerable yet financially godlike Saudis asserting their own way in the Middle East. Much of what they say is sincere as well. They Bushes have botched things up, more than half deliberately, in the occupation(scratch "liberation"), in the Palestinian problem, in long term stabilizing the Saudi regime, in hitting down the Shiites while reigning in dangerous Sunni elements and rivals, in securing the oil markets. ALL are dangerously threatened, increasingly volatile and hardly likely to improve with another application of America's deteriorating power. In any sense, they simply can't trust the Bushes. Everyone near their operations enjoys an escalating state of peril and personal threat.

What Israel is going through is much much worse, trapped not only like our troops in this dead end horror, but having to live there permanently in foredoomed gamble gone all wrong all the faster because of the American b%stards they trusted, propped and joined with. the war hysteria there is a tragic cover for what realization must come of the utterly dependent, losing position they are moving toward, creating enemies all the way down.

End the wars. Stop the killing. Get the world together to get people talking. Rights. Reality. The saudis will fall. Israel will not exist as a one religion theocracy along Old Testament hegemonies. The US needs to withdraw from the oil game and let the last resource work for the peoples there like it does for Venezuela now. And amid all the complexities and impossibilities, the chief obstacle is a few evil and hardened and stupid old men who need their names and crimes named and linked and punished.
To get at them the nation sponsored killing has to stop- cold turkey.

[bemildred]

10. That's my guess.

I think the King is worried about Iran and the rise of the Shi'ia crescent. The King has his own Shi'ia minority sitting on top of most of his oil. I think he has given up on the US as a useful ally in dealing with those issues.

[NewJeffCT]

11. Ms Perino - your boss, George W. Bush, has called it an occupation

From the White House website:

President Outlines Steps to Help Iraq Achieve Democracy and Freedom
Remarks by the President on Iraq and the War on Terror
May 24, 2004

<snip>

The first of these steps will occur next month, when our coalition will transfer full sovereignty to a government of Iraqi citizens who will prepare the way for national elections. On June 30th, the Coalition Provisional Authority will cease to exist, and will not be replaced. The occupation will end, and Iraqis will govern their own affairs. America's ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte, will present his credentials to the new president of Iraq. Our embassy in Baghdad will have the same purpose as any other American embassy, to assure good relations with a sovereign nation. America and other countries will continue to provide technical experts to help Iraq's ministries of government, but these ministries will report to Iraq's new prime minister.

<snip>

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html

[NewJeffCT]

13. damn that google - found another reference of Bush calling Iraq an occupation

One central commitment of that mission is the transfer of sovereignty back to the Iraqi people. We have set a deadline of June 30th. It is important that we meet that deadline. As a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation -- and neither does America. We're not an imperial power, as nations such as Japan and Germany can attest. We are a liberating power, as nations in Europe and Asia can attest, as well. America's objective in Iraq is limited, and it is firm: We seek an independent, free and secure Iraq.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040413-20.html

[malaise]

21. Oh Oh

Too good :D

[NewJeffCT]

22. I know he has used "occupation" or "occupiers" or similar on at least

a few other occasions. My googling skils are mediocre, however.

[11 Bravo]

14. I believe the administration also objects to the use of the word "dead" ...

when used to describe the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who are, not to put too fine a point on it, no longer breathing.

[Rydz777]

15. A semantical point

It's a semantical splitting of hairs, but when a country is in chaos, not safe to walk the streets, cars are blowing up, bombs going off on every corner, it does seem to be a bit of a stretch to call it "occupied."

[KansDem]

16. When Bush's main pimp is criticizing him, you know something is definitely awry

It wasn't enough that Bush sat idly by while the Saudis attacked us on 9/11...
It wasn't enough that Bush let OBL's relatives out of the country before they could be questioned by US law enforcement agents...
It wasn't enough that Bush attacked Iraq instead of the real terrorists...the Saudis
It wasn't enough that Bush has kowtowed to the Saudis since the 1970s when they financed his early business ventures...

But now that the Bush plan for Iraq has failed, the Saudis want him out...

[Garbo 2004]

17. UN did not authorize the invasion of Iraq & Chalabi's "invitation" doesn't count. n/t

[shadowknows69]

18. Quack Quack Quack

Fucking Alflak. Nuff said?

[malaise]

19. Fugg Bush n/t

[The Stranger]

20. Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. They're just 140,000 tourists there to improve their tans.

Not to be confused with "occupiers" just because they carry guns and imprison people.