Because it was created by an act of congress and renamed twice by acts of Congress after ww2.
If the Republicans want to rename DoD they could have put it in their "big beautiful bill", but they didn't. So it's still DoD and should be referred to as such.
Did it really??? We had lots of these type of wars before. They'd just sell us something about women's rights and that we'd be welcomed as liberators instead.
I feel better about a country that feels the need to sell it's people on wars under this premise, but it didn't matter to the people getting bombed. I'm not an accelerationist, but it might even be better this way since the American people aren't buying the rationales for this one.
Can't fight for the foreign rights of women while you disenfranchise your own women at home? I guess that would take logic to figure out so they can probably get away with it to their base, but the rest of the world sees right through you.
There were women that got to grow up with rights in Afganistan. People worked and fought to make that because that was a justification (one of) for that war. Now we dont even have that. Just the bombs and naked greed
Absolutely! They should rename it something like the "Ministry of Peace", so it sounds softer. I don't like negative and violent connotations. It scares me.
The "Department of War" was changed to the "National Military Establishment" by the National Security Act of 1947, and then to "Department of Defense" by the Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1958.
Absent an act of Congress changing its name again, the official and legal name is still "Department of Defense". Journalists accepting the new nickname uncritically are endorsing an unconstitutional power grab, and should be ridiculed and shamed for doing so.
It's not like Republicans don't have majorities in both houses of Congress sufficient to change the name, or even that congressional dems would waste their political energy opposing the vain renaming of a post-WW2 agency.
Hmm. If only we could come up with a select number of words to measure against to determine which major media outlets are propping up fascism with their choice of language and rhetoric. On the other hand i feel like its probably just all of them.
37 Comments
BillyClark@piefed.social · 55 pts · 158d
Every public figure who uses the term "Gulf of America" should be taken out to the exact center of it and left there in a life boat.
SARGE@startrek.website · 15 pts · 158d
Warl0k3@lemmy.world · 43 pts · 158d
... Why? It's a way more accurate name.
gens@programming.dev · 35 pts · 158d
"Department of Securing Oil Profits"
Wilco@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 158d
"Department of Fascist Fucktards" or "DoFF"
LurkingLuddite@piefed.social · 13 pts · 158d
Still a laughable (if it wasn't for reality) endeavor. It should be dismantled, not renamed.
HailSeitan@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 158d
Doesn’t calling it the Department of War make it easier to defund and eventually dismantle, though?
LillyPip@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 158d
In this political climate? Hell no, quite the opposite.
And this political climate is all about never allowing another political climate.
LurkingLuddite@piefed.social · 2 pts · 158d
You seriously going to ask that question after Trump won twice? This country is almost Warhammer levels of up its own ass about war being cool...
DomeGuy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 158d
Because it was created by an act of congress and renamed twice by acts of Congress after ww2.
If the Republicans want to rename DoD they could have put it in their "big beautiful bill", but they didn't. So it's still DoD and should be referred to as such.
chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 158d
HailSeitan@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 158d
Isn’t it good that we stop pretending it’s engaged in “defense”?
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works · -3 pts · 158d
No. At least pretending to be good prevented these latest kind of wars
angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com · 9 pts · 158d
Did it really??? We had lots of these type of wars before. They'd just sell us something about women's rights and that we'd be welcomed as liberators instead.
I feel better about a country that feels the need to sell it's people on wars under this premise, but it didn't matter to the people getting bombed. I'm not an accelerationist, but it might even be better this way since the American people aren't buying the rationales for this one.
AlexLost@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 158d
Can't fight for the foreign rights of women while you disenfranchise your own women at home? I guess that would take logic to figure out so they can probably get away with it to their base, but the rest of the world sees right through you.
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 158d
There were women that got to grow up with rights in Afganistan. People worked and fought to make that because that was a justification (one of) for that war. Now we dont even have that. Just the bombs and naked greed
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 158d
Uh... the War
ofon Terror?GalacticSushi@piefed.blahaj.zone · 12 pts · 158d
The only exception is when juxtaposing those titles with the administration's claims that this is not a war.
"Secretary of War Pete Kegsbreath, head of the Department of War, claims that he is not waging war by deploying weapons of war against Iran."
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 158d
Secretary of War of the Deparment of War plans on sending warfighters equiped with lethal weapon systems into war to not fight war. /s
HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 158d
HERE-HERE
Zagorath@aussie.zone · 6 pts · 158d
There-there?
HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 158d
Their-their
RichardDegenne@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 158d
They're, they're!
leftascenter@jlai.lu · 5 pts · 158d
They're t'heir
essell@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 158d
Torro Torro!
HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 158d
HERE-THEY'RE
WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 158d
Tora! Tora! Tora!
leftascenter@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 158d
Bonsoir@lemmy.ca · 11 pts · 158d
Absolutely! They should rename it something like the "Ministry of Peace", so it sounds softer. I don't like negative and violent connotations. It scares me.
DomeGuy@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 158d
The "Department of War" was changed to the "National Military Establishment" by the National Security Act of 1947, and then to "Department of Defense" by the Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1958.
Absent an act of Congress changing its name again, the official and legal name is still "Department of Defense". Journalists accepting the new nickname uncritically are endorsing an unconstitutional power grab, and should be ridiculed and shamed for doing so.
It's not like Republicans don't have majorities in both houses of Congress sufficient to change the name, or even that congressional dems would waste their political energy opposing the vain renaming of a post-WW2 agency.
Soup@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 158d
Republicans like “Noooo don’t deadname my special thing! Nooooo!!”
The anti-pronoun party once again fully understanding the concepts and yet showing us once again that the point is the cruelty, not consistency.
tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 157d
If the country survives we really need congress to officially name a DC public toilet for the current fascist
thoro@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 157d
Calling it the Department of War was like the one good thing they've ever done. It's the actual truth instead of the Orwellian nonsense
AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space · 10 pts · 158d
Just wait until Trump renames the USA to the Kingdom of Trump America, and the New York Times and CNN immediately comply as if it had always been so.
HowAbt2day@futurology.today · 8 pts · 158d
But a war-grade fart to remain consistent
cdf12345@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 158d
Ok but we’re going to have to kick another 100,000 people off Medicare to get it in the fart budget
HowAbt2day@futurology.today · 6 pts · 158d
Are there even that many left on it?
Manifish_Destiny@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 158d
Hmm. If only we could come up with a select number of words to measure against to determine which major media outlets are propping up fascism with their choice of language and rhetoric. On the other hand i feel like its probably just all of them.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -4 pts · 157d
Yes, the state is dumb. Titles are dumb. Social hierarchy is dumb. Capitalism is dumb. Etc.
TBH I'm not feeling good about all of this ableism. Typical lib meme - pushing for meaningless reformism while throwing the marginalized under a bus.