Since the day in September when President Donald Trump symbolically renamed the Department of Defense the Department of War, the US military has conducted at least 21 attacks on Venezuelan shipsresulting in the deaths of 83 people believed to be drug traffickers. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth convened an unprecedented and widely ridiculed conference. meeting of military generals and flag officers during which he declared his commitment to the “warrior ideal”. And Hegseth continued to fire or demote military generals and admirals, purging at least two dozen of them during his tenure. The New York Times reported.
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
“A different America is emerging from World War II,” said John C. McManus, a professor of military history at Missouri University of Science and Technology. A country once built on isolationism has transformed. “America, which has emerged from World War II, can no longer afford this. It is the world's leading nationalist structure.” The new structure of the Department of Defense is consistent with this, he said.
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
But a closer look at the department's history, historians told TPM, shows that a return to Washington's war spirit makes no sense for a modern nation. The ways and means of warfare had completely changed, and George Washington's America was not the global superpower that the United States is today.
“A different America is emerging from World War II,” said John C. McManus, a professor of military history at Missouri University of Science and Technology. A country once built on isolationism has transformed. “America, which has emerged from World War II, can no longer afford this. It is the world's leading nationalist structure.” The new structure of the Department of Defense is consistent with this, he said.
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Steve Yates, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former national security adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney, says Trump's name change makes a real difference. Yates told TPM that this is just one aspect of a broader shift aimed at deflating the Department of Defense's bloated bureaucracy and returning the department to its original war-fighting ideals laid down by George Washington and away from “nation building” and “peacekeeping.”
But a closer look at the department's history, historians told TPM, shows that a return to Washington's war spirit makes no sense for a modern nation. The ways and means of warfare had completely changed, and George Washington's America was not the global superpower that the United States is today.
“A different America is emerging from World War II,” said John C. McManus, a professor of military history at Missouri University of Science and Technology. A country once built on isolationism has transformed. “America, which has emerged from World War II, can no longer afford this. It is the world's leading nationalist structure.” The new structure of the Department of Defense is consistent with this, he said.
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Last Wednesday NBC News report found that the War Department's official rebranding, which can only be completed by congressional action, could cost taxpayers as much as $2 billion for signage updates, personnel items such as posters and pins, and technology changes.
Steve Yates, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former national security adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney, says Trump's name change makes a real difference. Yates told TPM that this is just one aspect of a broader shift aimed at deflating the Department of Defense's bloated bureaucracy and returning the department to its original war-fighting ideals laid down by George Washington and away from “nation building” and “peacekeeping.”
But a closer look at the department's history, historians told TPM, shows that a return to Washington's war spirit makes no sense for a modern nation. The ways and means of warfare had completely changed, and George Washington's America was not the global superpower that the United States is today.
“A different America is emerging from World War II,” said John C. McManus, a professor of military history at Missouri University of Science and Technology. A country once built on isolationism has transformed. “America, which has emerged from World War II, can no longer afford this. It is the world's leading nationalist structure.” The new structure of the Department of Defense is consistent with this, he said.
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
Last Wednesday NBC News report found that the War Department's official rebranding, which can only be completed by congressional action, could cost taxpayers as much as $2 billion for signage updates, personnel items such as posters and pins, and technology changes.
Steve Yates, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former national security adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney, says Trump's name change makes a real difference. Yates told TPM that this is just one aspect of a broader shift aimed at deflating the Department of Defense's bloated bureaucracy and returning the department to its original war-fighting ideals laid down by George Washington and away from “nation building” and “peacekeeping.”
But a closer look at the department's history, historians told TPM, shows that a return to Washington's war spirit makes no sense for a modern nation. The ways and means of warfare had completely changed, and George Washington's America was not the global superpower that the United States is today.
“A different America is emerging from World War II,” said John C. McManus, a professor of military history at Missouri University of Science and Technology. A country once built on isolationism has transformed. “America, which has emerged from World War II, can no longer afford this. It is the world's leading nationalist structure.” The new structure of the Department of Defense is consistent with this, he said.
Just like his previous one a directive that all new federal structures will be built according to the “classical” principle. President Donald Trump appears to be using symbols to literally take the country back in time. The restoration of the Pentagon's original name is a reference to the restoration of the American era, when civil rights were weak and the role of women was limited. From dismantling so-called diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives to militarized anti-immigrant campaigns, Trump is returning to the origins of George Washington's War Department.
“They see it through their very narrow lens of blaming political correctness,” said Kyle Longley, director of the War, Diplomacy and Society program at Chapman University.
Trump and Hegseth, he said, want to go back “to the good old days before 1947 and 1948. They look and go, wow, military desegregation didn't help. That's when political correctness came in. They won't say it outright, but that's what they mean.”
Trump's military establishment is “refocusing on readiness and lethality,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said in an emailed statement. “The White House is working hand in hand with the War Department to implement the order.”
“Just look at the purges”
US leaders in the late 1700s structured the national War Department following the example of Great Britain and other European countries. Department was responsible for the army and non-naval forces, while the navy remained independent. World War II and the Cold War meant that the department's responsibilities grew and evolved until, as America achieved global superpower status and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency formed, the Department of Defense was created to consolidate the various military and intelligence branches that had emerged over the previous 150 years.
Trump and Hegseth have called the 20th century name change “woke” and promote an aggressive, gleefully violent vision of US national security policy. In December Hegseth told reporters his Department of Defense will talk about “lethality, lethality, lethality. Everything else is gone.” During his January nomination hearingHegseth said he was chosen to “bring back the warrior culture to the Department of Defense.” Trump announced his intention to return the department to its colonial name during a press conference at the NATO summit in June.
“He used to be called the Minister of War…” Trump saidsurrounded by Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “Then we became politically correct and they called it Secretary of Defense. I don't know, maybe we'll have to start thinking about changing it.”
Longley doesn't think Trump or Hegseth have any idea of the military history of the outgoing War Department.
However, that doesn't mean they haven't come frighteningly close to recreating some of these political dynamics, especially on domestic soil.
“For Washington and early presidents, the War Department was primarily concerned with waging war against the Native Americans,” Longley said. He also noted the connection between the 18th century war against Native Americans and Trump's brutal anti-immigration campaign.
“This is a dramatic intersection with the militarization of American forces that can be used against immigrants right now, but also against American citizenssaid Longley.
High-ranking black people and women in the military are also being targeted by the administration. White men make up the vast majority of military generals and admirals. Women make up about 8% generals and flag officers. Only 6.5% of generals are black..
However, “just look at the purges of officers,” Longley said. They included a disproportionate number of women and people of color.
In response to TPM's inquiry, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in an emailed statement that the agency intends to make the name change permanent. Parnell said the closure delayed the “final cost estimate” for the name change and blamed the closure on Democrats.
“This change is a tribute to our proud heritage as it reflects the Department's core mission: winning wars,” Parnell said.
Who even cares?
Foreign conflicts or terrorism are not among the top three most important issues for Americans, according to recent data. ACP/Ipsos poll results released on Monday. November AP Voter Poll Also Finds Economy is the main concern of Americans. In a country where economic problems continue to predominate, it is difficult to imagine that the average voter would care or even notice that the name of the Department of Defense has been symbolically changed.
The Heritage Foundation's Yates, however, said states like Idaho, where he was GOP chairman, have a persistent electorate that cares about defense issues. And it's a place, Yates said, where War Department symbols or proposed Defense Department reforms can become “red meat for the campaign.”
“If I were still chairman and trying to bring the market back to the grassroots level,” Yates said, “this is something we could and should talk about among the things that I think households in rural Idaho would care about.”
Yates also suggested that service members and their families would care about the changes as they coincide with structural changes within the department. However, current and former defense experts have expressed concerns about Trump's national security policies. using obscure mid-20th century immigration law target pro-Palestinian protesters to bombing of the Venezuelan people on boats – from the very beginning.
“If we're just average service personnel doing our job, does it really impact our lives that much? Maybe not that much,” McManus said.
“The question, I guess, is whether the name change … has enough support,” he continued. “I think it's fair to say there was probably a name change in the '40s. I think it's more controversial now.”
