Monday's death of former Vice President Dick Cheney at age 84 has drawn reactions across the spectrum from U.S. citizens who remember a man who shaped war, peace and power for half a century.

Cheney, who served as President George W. Bush's vice president from 2001-2009, left an indelible mark on U.S. foreign policy, intelligence agencies and presidential authority. His death is prompting tributes from governors and members of Congress, and criticism from opponents.

Former President George W. Bush told Military.com the country lost “one of the most serious public servants of his generation.”

Bush said Cheney was a calm, steady presence in the White House after Sept. 11, 2001, and a leader who put national security first. The ex-president wrote that he and former First Lady Laura Bush “will remember Dick Cheney for the decent, honorable man that he was.”

Cheney, a Nebraska native, started life in Lincoln and grew into one of the most powerful national security figures in modern America.

Kindness And Fly Fishing

Cheney’s family said he died at home in Virginia, surrounded by his wife, Lynne, and daughters, Liz and Mary. The former lawmaker died of complications from pneumonia, vascular disease and cardiac failure.

In a written statement, the family called him “a great and good man who taught his children and grandchildren to love our country, and to live lives of courage, honor, love, kindness, and fly fishing.”

“We are grateful beyond measure for all Dick Cheney did for our country. And we are blessed beyond measure to have loved and been loved by this noble giant of a man," they added.

Outpouring of Remembrance

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds offered condolences and called Cheney “a remarkable statesman in Congress and the Executive Branch, in times of peace and war, at home and abroad.”

She added that “above all, he will be remembered as a patriot who dedicated his life to the service of his country.”

The Heritage Foundation, one of the nation's largest conservative movements since its 1973 institution, praised Cheney in an elaborate statement referring to him as "a committed conservative who dedicated his life to public service."

“Cheney was a kind man with high expectations and even deeper loyalty to America and its defenders, his family, and his friends," the statement reads. "He gave me great opportunities and was devoted to conservative principles and to all those he worked with.  Cheney ably championed the Second Amendment, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He was an experienced and loyal counselor to President Bush and the various American leaders he served."

They also mention how in 2002, he helped present Heritage’s highest award, the Clare Boothe Luce Award, to Lady Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He won that same award himself in 2011. 

“Cheney was a patriot and a longtime friend to Heritage," Heritage added. "We will remember him with fondness and gratitude. I will miss him, and our nation owes him and his family gratitude for his long career of public service. We extend our condolences to his wife, Lynne, their two daughters, and their grandchildren.” 

Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) recalled how he worked with Cheney for more than 40 years.

“While we did not always agree on everything, Cheney was a man I worked with on and off for over forty years in politics and government,” Cole said.

He remembered how Cheney and Bush came to Oklahoma during his first run for Congress. “This is something I will never forget.”

Congressman Adrian Smith called Cheney “a patriot who dedicated his life to service,” adding, “from the Capitol to the Pentagon, to the White House, he left an indelible mark on history.”

Veterans Recall His Leadership

The American Legion mourned Cheney’s passing, calling him one of its “most distinguished Boys State graduates.”

In a statement to Military.com, National Commander Dan K. Wiley said: “America lost a longtime public servant, and The American Legion lost one of its most distinguished Boys State graduates.” Wiley said Cheney became a nationally known figure through his steady leadership during the Gulf War as Secretary of Defense. He added that Cheney brought “decades of experience” to the Bush administration and “nobody questioned his patriotism and love for his country.”

The Legion offered condolences to the Cheney family and to “those who knew him best in his home state of Wyoming.” 

The organization also noted Cheney’s long ties to the Legion. He played baseball for American Legion Post 2 in Casper, Wyoming, and addressed national Legion gatherings as vice president.

At the American Legion’s 90th National Convention in 2008, Cheney told veterans, “The Legion serves America by leading on important issues, from health care and education, to employment opportunities for veterans, to homeland security, to a better quality of life for our military families. You proudly wear an emblem that stands ‘for God and Country,’ and the highest rights of man.”

Civil Liberties Groups See Different Legacy

Human rights advocates and other organizations offered a different perspective following Cheney's passing.

The Center for Constitutional Rights told Military.com that Cheney will be remembered for controversial post-9/11 detention and interrogation policies, citing the invasion of Iraq, surveillance programs, and the treatment of detainees. The group said its concerns reflect what it described as long-lasting impacts on civilians and detainees affected by those policies.

Federal Agencies Stay Silent

Military.com asked the Pentagon, CIA, FBI, the White House, House leadership, veteran groups, and senior national security offices for reaction. None responded at press time.

The Marine Corps replied by saying it could not provide a statement due to a funding lapse and legal restrictions.

The silence was noticeable considering that Cheney spent decades inside the same institutions that declined to comment. He served in Congress, ran the Pentagon as secretary of defense, and later became vice president. None of the agencies contacted, including the Department of Defense (War) and the White House, responded to requests for comment about his death.

The flag at the White House was lowered to half-staff around 10 a.m., several hours after his death was announced.

South Korea is joining a small circle of nations that operate nuclear-powered submarines.

On Oct. 29 during his days-long trip to Asia, U.S. President Donald Trump announced following his meeting with various heads of state that nuclear submarines will be built at the Philadelphia shipyards in the United States. The deal came after the president announced that an economic agreement was being finalized for South Korea to invest $350 billion in the U.S. as tariffs continue to impact domestic and foreign policy.

“Our (U.S and South Korea’s) military alliance is stronger than ever before, and based on that, I have given them approval to build a Nuclear Powered Submarine," Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The proverbial green light turns South Korea into a blue-water navy and places the nation among a small group with such capabilities. Only the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France, India and Australia have moved toward nuclear-powered submarines.

Bruce Bennett, a senior defense analyst at the RAND Corporation, told Military.com that the submarine brings South Korea closer to wartime operational control of allied forces. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has pushed for that authority, with a nuclear submarine now giving the nation the ability to act without waiting for U.S. direction.

Military.com asked the State Department how the approval changes the balance of power. They referred the inquiry to the Pentagon, which at press time did not respond.

Domestic Responsibility

A nuclear submarine gives South Korea the reach to slip into deep Pacific waters, hunt Chinese and North Korean vessels, and guard sea lanes with U.S. forces. South Korea's submarine is anticipated run on uranium fuel enriched inside the country.

The move signals a new kind of alliance. Washington wants Seoul to take more responsibility for its own defense and prepare for wartime control of allied forces. South Korean officials have pushed for that authority for years, but a nuclear-powered submarine brings that goal closer.

Military.com contacted U.S. Forces Korea and the U.S. Embassy in Seoul for comment.

The approval changes the U.S.-South Korea alliance. A nuclear submarine can stay underwater for long periods and track Chinese ships far from shore. Analysts say Washington wants South Korea to carry more of the security burden. Military.com asked U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and the U.S. Pacific Fleet whether the submarine would affect American posture in the region. Neither responded.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited South Korea while discussions were ongoing. His visit added political attention to the program and raised pressure on lawmakers in both countries.

Military.com asked the Defense Department whether the visit signaled new momentum. The Pentagon did not respond.

Crowded Waters

North Korea has previously attempted to build nuclear-armed submarines, but those vessels have limited range and operate with louder engines. A South Korean nuclear submarine could track North Korean and Chinese submarines in the Yellow Sea, the Sea of Japan, and a wider Pacific region that has become more crowded.

The U.S. Navy maintains aircraft carriers, destroyers and nuclear-powered submarines in the area. Japan continues to expand its submarine fleet. Australia plans to build nuclear-powered submarines through the AUKUS agreement. South Korea is preparing to join them.

South Korea has never operated a nuclear-powered submarine. The new program would change the balance on the Korean Peninsula and increase pressure on China. The region now waits to see how quickly Seoul will move from approval to construction.

Continuing U.S. military attacks on boats and individuals accused of trafficking narcotics through the Caribbean and potentially in association with Venezuela has drawn differing reactions from the Trump administration and members of Congress.

Questions by legislators in Washington abound on whether they should have the official say in terms of escalated military aggression^[1] off the South American coast, where both Venezuela and Columbia have been embroiled with the U.S. as tensions have risen in recent weeks—in addition to claims that briefings have been held^[2] but have shut out some of the highest-elected lawmakers due to partisanship or otherwise.

More than 60 individuals have been killed by U.S. boat strikes hailed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has warned that the 15 or so attacks since September are preventing “narco-terrorists” from drug smuggling to areas like the U.S.

Recently, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the strikes part of a broader “new game” being executed by the U.S. government and military. He praised President Donald Trump, a longtime ally, for “doing the right thing” and suggested that congressional approval may not be necessary in such instances.

White House 'Maintaining Transparency'

“On the campaign trail, President Trump promised to take on the cartels and he has taken unprecedented action to stop the scourge of narcoterrorism that has resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Americans,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told Military.com^[3]. “All of these decisive strikes have been against designated narco-terrorists, as affirmed by U.S. intelligence, bringing deadly poison to our shores, and the president will continue to use every element of American power to stop drugs from flooding into our country and to bring those responsible to justice while maintaining transparency with the Hill.”

A senior Trump administration official told Military.com last week that the administration has provided Congress seven separate classified briefings since early September, covering members or staff from House leadership, Senate leadership, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, and the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees.

The Department of War is working through additional requests for information from Capitol Hill and continues to make senior officials available to answer questions, the official added, calling the Trump administration “more forthcoming with the legal rationale behind these strikes than prior administrations”—contrasting their ongoing actions in the Caribbean with the 500 or so drone strikes authorized and conducted by the Obama administration “without offering any legal justification to Congress."

Trump Administration Claims Disputed

A source familiar with the situation and associated with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), who sits on the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, told Military.com^[4]: “The White House is counting the same briefing multiple times based on individual or small group touches with certain members and staff.”

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), ranking member and former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told the press last week that the system is designed for Congress to approve such military action.

"When you politicize decision-making about putting our servicemembers in harm's way, you make them less safe," Warner said.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, (D-IL), also a member of the Armed Services Committee, said last week that she was “disgusted” about so-called secret briefings exempting Democrats from the conversation on national security.

“This is ridiculous,” Duckworth said, per reports. “This is not how we will operate in the Senate.”

Sen. Adam Schiff, (D-CA), who has sponsored legislation mandating that Congress provide approval for continued military strikes, said the legislative body’s role involves moments just like these.

“It makes no sense to give a briefing to Republicans only,” Schiff told reporters last week. “This is exactly why Congress needs to be brought in to any decision about use of force, and I hope we’ll have more support for the war powers resolution when we take it up.”

Sen. Chris Coons, (D-DE), a senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations panel, questioned whether the “long-standing tradition” of conversation between the Pentagon, presidential administration and the highest levels of Congress is waning as this situation unfolds.

He’s only received the “most superficial” information on future plans pertaining to Venezuela and South America.

Bipartisan Calls For More Transparency

On Friday, during an appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) expressed some of the same disillusionment as his colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

“People were very frustrated in the information that was being provided," said Turner, a House Armed Services Committee member, of a Thursday meeting. "It was a bipartisan briefing, but people were not happy with the level information that was provided, and certainly the level of legal justification that was provided."

Republican Sens. James Lankford (OK) and Rand Paul (KY) are among conservatives veering from Sen. Graham’s position, warning of ongoing attacks without congressional approval.

Lankford has stated he would be “apoplectic” if the Biden administration had taken the same steps as those being carried out by Trump and his administration.

Paul said the U.S. is engaging in “extrajudicial killings…akin to what China does, to what Iran does with drug dealers.”

Military.com reached out to the offices of Lankford and Paul for comment.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) reportedly attended a briefing last week only to find that just Republicans were present.

Rounds said he received a phone call from the White House on Thursday asking if he had concerns.

“I said, ‘Yup.’ Because Intel and Armed Services, we do things on a bipartisan basis when it comes to this, we want to keep it that way,” Rounds said, according to the Associated Press.