• scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Setting aside my Trump hate for a moment: this is a good thing. “Department of Defense” was always a euphemism. “Defense spending” my ass. Let’s call it what it is and then see if Americans feel as good about spending so much on a “Department of War” versus “Defense.”

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      29 minutes ago

      This isn’t a good thing because it’s not an effort to be more honest, it’s a signal of future intent.

    • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Do not underestimate this country’s propensity to proudly engage in jingoism. Just look at our history to see how that went.

    • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Thinking like that its a good thing right up until the voters are actually stoked about a department of war.

      Guarantee it wont be long until youre seeing red hats going off about how cool it is they finally have a department of war as if its a whole new thing.

      “Remember how much ass we kicked with only a defense department? Look out world! MIGHTY TRUMP finally made a department of war too!”

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I’m sure you’re right about a certain segment of people. I don’t think the euphemistic name is holding those people back from loving the military though.

        I do think it’s hard for Congress to sell the general public on “cuts to our defense” though, and cuts to the “Department of war” will be an easier sell.