One of consequences of the Republicans' shameful Murtha stunt two weeks ago has been a shift by Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA 6th) in his public position on the Iraq war. -- Dicks is a hawkish Democrat who not only backed the decision to go to war on Iraq but "worked quietly and behind the scenes to build Democratic support for the Iraq war resolution" (2004 Almanac of American Politics [Washington, DC: National Journal Group, 2003], p. 1698). -- This week, though, he reversed his position by giving an extended interview on the subject to the Seattle Times.[1] -- Anger at efforts to smear his friend John Murtha (D-PA 12th) and those questioning the Iraq war played a crucial role in bringing about the shift, according to Dicks. -- The Bremerton-born former Warren Magnuson aide has represented the most populous part of Pierce County, WA, for almost 29 years, but he told reporter Alicia Mundy that "I can't remember anything quite as traumatic as this in my history here." -- By his own account, what really riled Dicks was being "lumped in with peaceniks," Mundy reports. -- After all, Dicks has long been a pillar of the U.S. national security state. -- He serves on the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee of which Rep. Murtha is the ranking Democratic member. -- No peacenik he, Dicks actually "complained when B-2s [Stealth bombers, a Boeing product] weren't used in 1998 air attacks on Iraq" (2004 Almanac of American Politics, p. 1698). -- Dicks's hometown paper, the News Tribune (Tacoma, WA), had to content itself with an AP story about the Seattle Times story, which it ran on the front page of Saturday's paper.[2] -- The right-wing web site News Busters immediately howled at Dicks for "doing a 'Murtha.'"[3] -- Frankly, though, it is hard to understand why Dicks has taken so long -- so long to realize that the Bush administration was cooking intelligence about Iraq, and so long to realize the unprincipled character of current Republican leadership. -- This was clear to "peaceniks" long before the war broke out; perhaps he should pay more attention to them. -- Maybe it's the shift in public opinion polls that make certain things easier to perceive. -- But while he does not want to be "lumped in" with people like ourselves, we're sure most "peaceniks" will welcome Norm Dicks's Thanksgiving 2005 change of heart on the Iraq war....
1.
CORRECTION: A previous version of this story incorrectly said Norm Dicks is a member of the House Intelligence Committee. Dicks is no longer a member of that committee, although he participated in various intelligence briefings about Iraq.
DEFENSE HAWK DICKS SAYS HE NOW SEES WAR AS A MISTAKE
By Alicia Mundy
Seattle Times
November 25, 2005
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002645321_normdicks25m.html
WASHINGTON -- It was after 11 p.m. on Friday when Rep. Norm Dicks finally left the Capitol, fresh from the heated House debate on the Iraq war. He was demoralized and angry.
Sometime during the rancorous, seven-hour floor fight over whether to immediately withdraw U.S. troops, one Texas Republican compared those who question America's military strategy in Iraq to the hippies and "peaceniks" who protested the Vietnam War and "did terrible things to troop morale."
The House was in a frenzy over comments by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who had called for the troops to leave Iraq in six months. In response, the White House initially likened Murtha, a 37-year veteran of the Marines and an officer in Vietnam, to lefty moviemaker Michael Moore.
Then a new Republican representative from Ohio, Jean Schmidt, relayed a message to the House that she said she had received from a Marine colonel in her district: "Cowards cut and run; Marines never do."
During much of the debate, Dicks, a Democrat from Bremerton, huddled in the Democrats' cloakroom with Murtha, a longtime friend. Both men are known for their strong support of the military over the years. Now, they felt, that record was being questioned.
"There was a lot of anger back there," Dicks said in an interview this week. "It was powerful. I can't remember anything quite as traumatic as this in my history here."
Near midnight, he drove to his D.C. home, poured a drink, and wondered how defense hawks like he and Murtha had gotten lumped in with peaceniks by their colleagues and the administration.
And he thought about all that had happened over the past couple of years to change his mind about the war in Iraq.
VOTED TO BACK BUSH
In October 2002, Dicks voted loudly and proudly to back President Bush in a future deployment of U.S. troops to Iraq -- one of two Washington State Democratic House members to do so. Adam Smith, whose district includes Fort Lewis, was the other.
Dicks thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and wouldn't hesitate to use them against the United States.
After visiting Iraq early in the war, "Norm told me the Iraqis were going to be throwing petals at American troops," Murtha said in an interview this week.
Dicks now says it was all a mistake -- his vote, the invasion, and the way the United States is waging the war.
While he disagrees with Murtha's conclusion that U.S. troops should be withdrawn within six months, Dicks said, "He may well be right if this insurgency goes much further."
"The insurgency has gotten worse and worse," he said. "That's where Murtha's rationale is pretty strong -- we're talking a lot of casualties with no success in sight. The American people obviously know that this war is a mistake."
Dicks, a former member of the House Intelligence Committee, says he's particularly angry about the intelligence that supported going to war.
Without the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), he said, he would "absolutely not" have voted for the war.
The Bush administration has accused some members of Congress of rewriting history by claiming the president misled Americans about the reasons for going to war. Congress, the administration says, saw the same intelligence and agreed Iraq was a threat.
But Dicks says the intelligence was "doctored." And he says the White House didn't plan for and deploy enough troops for the growing insurgency.
"A lot of us relied on [former CIA director] George Tenet. We had many meetings with the White House and CIA, and they did not tell us there was a dispute between the CIA, Commerce, or the Pentagon on the WMDs," he said.
He and Murtha tended to give the military, the CIA, and the White House the benefit of the doubt, Dicks says. But he now says he and his colleagues should have pressed much harder for answers.
"NORM . . . HAS AGONIZED"
"All of us have gone through a difficult period, but Norm really has agonized," Murtha said this week.
Murtha and Dicks were appointed to the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee in 1979, three years after Dicks first was elected to Congress. They rarely have disagreed, especially in their support of the military.
In October 2002, Dicks made an impassioned speech during the House debate over whether to authorize the president to send troops to Iraq without waiting for the United Nations to act.
"Based on the briefings I have had, and based on the information provided by our intelligence agencies to members of Congress, I now believe there is credible evidence that Saddam Hussein has developed sophisticated chemical and biological weapons, and that he may be close to developing a nuclear weapon," Dicks said at the time.
By spring 2003, U.N. weapons inspectors said they hadn't found hard evidence of WMDs in Iraq. But Dicks remained convinced of Iraq's threat.
"We're going to find things [Saddam] had not disclosed," he said shortly before the war began in March 2003. "There is no doubt about that. Period. Underlined."
By June of that year, with no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons found, Dicks remained steadfast in his support for the war but called for a congressional inquiry into the intelligence agencies' work on Iraq. "I think the American people deserve to know what happened and why it happened," he said at the time.
That same month, Dicks was upset when a good friend, Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, was forced into retirement after telling Congress that the secretary of defense was not sending enough troops to win the peace.
GROWING DOUBTS
On July 6, 2003, Dicks awoke to read the now-famous New York Times opinion piece by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had been sent on a CIA mission to investigate a report that Iraq had tried to buy nuclear materials in Africa.
Wilson wrote that he had found no evidence of such Iraqi intentions and criticized Bush for making the claim in his State of the Union address two months before the invasion.
"That Joe Wilson article was very troubling," Dicks said.
Dicks grew somber about Iraq. Rep. Jim McDermott, who represents Seattle and had opposed the war from the start, talked with him about it.
"Norm is a lot like Jack Murtha. These are guys with a somewhat different philosophy than me," McDermott said recently. "This an extremely difficult time for them because they have to reassess what they were led to believe" about prewar intelligence.
The White House maintains it did nothing to mischaracterize what it knew about Iraq and its weapons.
Dicks' private concerns became more public two months ago. At a breakfast fundraiser on Capitol Hill, Dicks surprised the guests with a tough talk against the war.
The White House last Friday called Dicks to gauge his support. House GOP leaders were pushing for a vote on a resolution they hoped would put Democrats on the spot by forcing them to either endorse an immediate troop withdrawal or stay the course in Iraq.
Dicks said he told the White House that "their attack on Murtha was the most outrageous comment I've ever heard."
The resolution, denounced by Democrats, ultimately was defeated 403-3.
Dicks says the Pentagon should begin a phased withdrawal and leave some troops to help maintain order and train a new Iraq army. "We've got to be very concerned that Iraq comes out of this whole," he said.
But he added, "We can't take forever."
Some people say it takes eight to nine years to control an insurgency, Dicks said.
"I don't think the American people will give eight to nine years, and I sure as heck won't."
--Alicia Mundy: 202-662-7457 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
2.
'No Success in Sight'
REP. DICKS REVERSES OPINION ON IRAQ WAR
** Congressman Norm Dicks says he thinks the war in Iraq was a mistake. He blames 'doctored' intelligence for leading him and others to vote for it. **
Associated Press
November 25, 2005
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/5357855p-4848870c.html (News Tribune [Tacoma, WA], p. A1)
or
http://159.54.227.3/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051126/NEWS/51126005 (The Olympian, headline: "Rep. Dicks Backs Off War Stance")
SEATTLE -- Three years ago, U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., loudly backed President Bushs plan to deploy troops to Iraq.
A longtime defense hawk, he thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and wouldnt hesitate to use them.
Now hes joined the ranks of politicians who believe the war was a mistake -- his vote, the invasion, and the way the war is being waged.
Dicks doesnt agree with Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who has called for troops to leave Iraq in six months, but told the Seattle Times: He may well be right if this insurgency goes much further.
Dicks, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said hes especially angry about the intelligence used to support the war. He said he believes the intelligence was doctored and that the White House did not prepare for the insurgency thats unfolded. He said he would absolutely not have voted for the war had he known there were no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.
On July 6, 2003, Dicks read the now-famous New York Times opinion piece by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who wrote about being sent on a CIA mission and finding no evidence of Iraqs intentions to buy nuclear materials in Africa -- a claim Bush made in his State of the Union address two months before the invasion.
Dicks grew somber about Iraq. Rep. Jim McDermott, an anti-war Democrat who represents Seattle, talked with him about it.
Norm is a lot like Jack Murtha. These are guys with a somewhat different philosophy than me, McDermott told the Times. This is an extremely difficult time for them because they have to reassess what they were led to believe about prewar intelligence.
The White House maintains it did nothing to mischaracterize what it knew about Iraq and its weapons.
Dicks private concerns became more public two months ago, when he surprised guests at a breakfast fundraiser with tough talk against the war.
Last Friday, the White House called Dicks to gauge his support. House GOP leaders were pushing for a vote on a resolution they hoped would put Democrats on the spot by forcing them either to endorse an immediate troop withdrawal or stay the course in Iraq.
Dicks said he told the White House that their attack on Murtha was the most outrageous comment Ive ever heard.
The resolution, denounced by Democrats, ultimately was defeated 403-3.
Dicks favors a phased withdrawal that would leave some troops to help maintain order and train a new Iraq army. Weve got to be very concerned that Iraq comes out of this whole, he said.
But he added, We cant take forever.
Some say it takes eight to nine years to control an insurgency, Dicks noted. I dont think the American people will give eight to nine years, and I sure as heck wont.
3.
REP. DICKS DOES A 'MURTHA' ASSISTED BY THE SAME REVISIONIST TACTICS
By Noel Sheppard
News Busters: Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias
November 25, 2005
The Associated Press and United Press International are reporting that another Democratic hawk, Norm Dicks (D-Washington), has changed his position on the Iraq war. They are both quoting from and referencing a Seattle Times article first published about 16 hours ago entitled Defense hawk Dicks says he now sees war as a mistake. Yet, they are conveniently ignoring previous statements made by Dicks concerning the war that were also reported by the Seattle Times.
Todays article stated:
Dicks now says it was all a mistake -- his vote, the invasion, and the way the United States is waging the war.
While he disagrees with Murtha's conclusion that U.S. troops should be withdrawn within six months, Dicks said, He may well be right if this insurgency goes much further.
The insurgency has gotten worse and worse, he said. That's where Murtha's rationale is pretty strong -- we're talking a lot of casualties with no success in sight. The American people obviously know that this war is a mistake."
Yet, much like what transpired after Rep. John Murthas (D-Pennsylvania) call for troop withdrawals last Thursday, the initial reports on Dicks are conveniently ignoring the recent history of the congressman. For instance, the article continued:
Dicks, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, says he's particularly angry about the intelligence that supported going to war.
Without the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), he said, he would absolutely not have voted for the war."
A lot of us relied on [former CIA director] George Tenet. We had many meetings with the White House and CIA, and they did not tell us there was a dispute between the CIA, Commerce or the Pentagon on the WMDs, he said.
Yet, this is not what Dicks said in September 2002 before the October 11 congressional vote on the war resolution, and before former Secretary of State Colin Powell had presented the Administrations case to the United Nations. In fact, the Seattle Times is ignoring a report that it published on this very subject on September 25, 2002:
Norm Dicks wants to take down Saddam Hussein.
Dicks, D-Tacoma, is convinced that Saddam can't be trusted. He wants the United Nations to try to enforce its resolutions against Iraq, though he doubts Saddam will reveal where his chemical and biological weapons are.
His business over the last nine years has been deceit, said Dicks, who gets regular intelligence briefings as a senior member of the Defense spending panel. What I worry about is that there are al-Qaida people residing in Baghdad as we speak.
Dicks says the case needs to be made that an Iraq invasion is part of the war on terrorism. And as head of a terrorist state, Hussein needs to be deposed, unless he is willing to completely disarm, he said.
Of course, though the Seattle Times logged that report more than three years ago, theres not only no mention of it in todays article, but also no suggestion that Dicks might have misled anyone with those statements.
Another fascinating side of this story is the Joe Wilson connection made in todays report:
On July 6, 2003, Dicks awoke to read the now-famous New York Times opinion piece by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had been sent on a CIA mission to investigate a report that Iraq had tried to buy nuclear materials in Africa.
Wilson wrote that he had found no evidence of such Iraqi intentions and criticized Bush for making the claim in his State of the Union address two months before the invasion.
That Joe Wilson article was very troubling, Dicks said."
Yet, about three months later, Dicks was part of a congressional group that toured Iraq to determine the need for an additional $87 billion to be spent on the war. It seems that what Dicks saw on that visit was significantly more important than what Wilson said in his op-ed. As the Seattle Times -- once again -- reported on September 29, 2003:
There has been a lot of controversy about the money needed for Iraq, but when Congress members see the conditions here, they will recognize that this money is badly needed, said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Bremerton, a House Appropriations Committee member.
Our intent was to liberate them from Saddam Hussein, Dicks said. We are here now to help our friends in Iraq improve conditions for their people. There is absolutely no question that progress has been made . . . but it is a team effort."
It appears that not only has Dicks forgotten his own words, but so has the Seattle Times. Such amnesia appears to be impacting many mainstream media outlets these days.