Paul: Lying on Saudi Arabia

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) likes to spout out his theory of why the United States was attacked on 9/11: we brought it on ourselves by interfering in the Middle East's business, and occupying their lands. Besides the fact he's blaming America right before the tenth anniversary of 9/11, he's also lying his old crazy ass off.

Paul usually points to our intervention in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War as the linchpin of jihadists, who he rejects are engaged in an holy war against us, and the reason we were attacked.

Say what?

As someone who has read several autobiographies of those involved (Dick Cheney and Dan Quayle), as well as general history, I would like to remind Mr. Paul of several key facts about our "intervention" in Saudi Arabia.

1. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and was on his way to Saudi Arabia. The United States, for reasons of friendship, leadership and economics, could not allow this evil disregard of territorial integrity stand. 
2. The United States asked Saudi Arabia if we could use their country as our base of operations during both Operation Desert Shield, which was to protect Saudi Arabia, and Operation Desert Storm, and the Kingdom approved once we guaranteed our dedication to actually winning.
3. We never occupied Saudi Arabia. The United States never dictated domestic policy to our friends and we almost entirely left once the Operation was complete. We kept some troops, with their permission, to enforce two separate no-fly zones. 

If this "occupation" by the United States was the reason we were attacked on 9/11, as Mr. Paul surmises, we should be proud of it. Because it only backs up the opinion that our enemies are pure evil: they attacked us for the sole reason we liberated Kuwait and saved Saudi Arabia from Saddam's imperialistic desires.

What say you?