If your impression of the past 14 years of American foreign and security policy was, "Needs more Dick Cheney," then I have good news for you: You are getting more Dick Cheney. And he's practically salivating over the prospect of a terrorist attack "far deadlier" than 9/11 -- hopefully involving nukes.
Cheney has been making the media rounds especially hard in the past few weeks after taking the time to diss the president over his withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan in the Wall Street Journal and soberly informing Americans, "Mr. Obama is busy ushering America's adversaries into positions of power in the Middle East." He also called him a "fool" and claimed "that without American pre-eminence, there can be no world order."
Cheney, who is of course a much more serious and dependable leader than Barack Obama, then solidified his rhetorical triumph by appearing on radio shows with Rush Limbaugh and noted right-wing crazy person Hugh Hewitt. It was on the latter that we got this delicious tidbit:
"I think there will be another attack. And next time I think it's likely to be far deadlier than the last one. You can just imagine what would happen if somebody could smuggle a nuclear device, put it in a shipping container, and drive it down the Beltway outside Washington, D.C."
Hewitt then asked Cheney if "military rule" would be necessary in that scenario, to which the ex-VP details the "government in waiting" program and mentions that it would "maintain a constitutional basis" for continued governance.
It's really too bad for Cheney this didn't happen during Bush's tenure, so that he could rule America from a dark, trap-lined cave which would periodically pitch forth orders to the surface on parchment made from human skin. But we only got the September 11 attacks, which killed 2,977 people. And which, by the way, George Bush's White House willfully ignored warnings about, kind of making it partially Cheney's fault.
Another massive terrorist attack might vindicate the Kissinger-esque worldview of man best known for helping to unnecessarily and illegally invade Iraq and telling a senator, "Go fuck yourself," but if there is one, there's little doubt a great deal of the blame would still lay with Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the incompetent administration that spent an entire decade pissing off the Middle East. Cheney mentioned in his WSJ column that the number of Salafist groups increased by 58% from 2010 to 2013. It's almost like that was the same time period Obama spent trying to pull troops out of the countries Bush and Cheney invaded! Thanks to the total failure of the U.S. war effort in Iraq, al-Qaeda offshoot ISIS now controls a territory the size of Belgium.
But never mind all that. How many dead Americans will it take to placate this ravenous beast? And what sins did the U.S. commit to deserve Dick Cheney?