Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump’s Department of War rebrand is long overdue
UnHerd ^ | September 5, 2025 - 3:30pm | Sohrab Ahmari

Posted on 09/05/2025 2:40:56 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

When Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon executed an ill-conceived invasion of Iraq in 2003, was it really pursuing American defence? All but a handful of unreconstructed Iraq hawks would disagree. So it’s welcome news that President Trump has restored the Defense Department’s original name, the Department of War.

Talk of renaming the DoD has roiled Republican circles for some time. During the 2024 GOP primary, Nikki Haley brainstormed about changing the name of the Department of Defense to the “Department of Offense”. That was an unmistakable throwback to circa 2003 neoconservative blowhardery, and a good reminder of why the Haleys of the world are no longer at the helm of the conservative movement.

Trump’s choice of restored name for the department, by contrast, has a long and honourable pedigree. The Department of War was created by the first US Congress in 1789. The Cabinet-level leaders of this agency were known as secretaries of war.

The emphasis on “war” was a relic of an age that was more forthright about war-declaring and war-making. It wasn’t until after the Second World War, under the Truman administration, that the department came to be called the Department of Defense, following a brief interval when it was known as the National Military Establishment.

Far from restraining war, the renaming to do “DoD” coincided with the rise of a trigger-happy security state that increasingly sidestepped the legislative branch in determining whether America goes to war, as required by law. Congress, for its part, abdicated its constitutional power to declare war. Military interventions, whether just and necessary or otherwise, became something the executive branch launched and the legislature “authorised”.

Framed as “defence,” war was easier to swallow. Without a draft, Americans could no longer feel the gravity of war, and the imperative to avoid it, if...

(Excerpt) Read more at unherd.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 09/05/2025 2:40:56 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I’m surprised they kept “Department.” It sounds feminine. War Division sounds better to my ears.


2 posted on 09/05/2025 2:47:04 PM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kleon

War Department. That’s what it was called during WW2.


3 posted on 09/05/2025 3:30:20 PM PDT by 6ppc (During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act -George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 6ppc

It sounds like something at Nieman Marcus. Totally inappropriate.


4 posted on 09/05/2025 3:49:39 PM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I guess it appeals to some.

I think it’s stupid. And it plays into Trump’s “Military School Persona” crap. I lived with those folks for four years. He never got over it. It was first evident in his love of Patton and the nick names of “his generals.” Listening to him, he fell in love with George C Scott and Mario Puzo.

A rose is a rose is a rose.

The good news is he isn’t spending a lot of money on the rebranding.

And doesn’t this require some Congressional action? I know the DOD was created in the Defense Act of 1947(?).

Much ado about nothing.

Now change the Air Force back to the Army Air Corps...which just sounded cool...and I will be on board. Until then, this makes some happy. Most everyone else just don’t care.


5 posted on 09/05/2025 4:44:19 PM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

What did that old wind bag say To kill people and break things


6 posted on 09/05/2025 4:54:57 PM PDT by al baby (Whoopie Cushion Goldberg )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

So, since DOD is the result of the merger of the War Department and the Navy Department, does this mean the Navy Department will be returning to the cabinet?


7 posted on 09/05/2025 4:57:19 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Assez de mensonges et de phrases)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
There are few people who love DJT more than me. But this is unnecessary. Even foolish.
8 posted on 09/05/2025 5:25:35 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Import The Third World,Become The Third World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

1789.
Having parts of the Govt go back to anything with a date of 17something is as far away from a modern Deep State and Swamp as we can get.


9 posted on 09/05/2025 5:44:22 PM PDT by delchiante
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson