ViceZilla’s Views

WASHINGTON, March 29 (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday rejected Saudi Arabia’s charge that Iraq is under an “illegitimate foreign occupation” and said U.S. troops are there at Iraq’s invitation, under a U.N. mandate.

Saudi King Abdullah rattled Washington on Wednesday by telling an Arab summit that, “In beloved Iraq, blood flows between brothers in the shadow of illegitimate foreign occupation and hateful sectarianism, threatening a civil war.”
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the United States and Saudi Arabia have a close and cooperative relationship but made clear 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.
Since when has the U.N. backed the US war on Iraq? If I remember correctly, George “Bring it on” Bush and the UK went into Iraq alone, without the U.N.’s (or World Leaders’) support.

Article 2, section 4 of the U.N. Charter reads as follows: All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

So if the US and UK didn’t have the support of the U.N. from the beginning, how can they expect to be backed by the U.N. now? And as far as Bush’s claim of the US military being in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi Government, this is debatable for obvious reasons
I was under the understanding that one of the traits of a pathological liar is that he or she actually believes the lies that he or she has told. Is this the case here?

Tags: Bush Administration, War in Iraq //