• SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      And they STILL think this. And before Canadians get all smug, look at how popular Smith and Ford are and how Poilievre got elected by a landslide in AB. The more Doug grifts, the better he does in polls.

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days 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
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

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

    • GreenShimada@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      There’s a reason why after WWII the Department of War was renamed Department of Defense.

      We weren’t at war. We’re not currently at war, either. Chester’s gotta ask Congress to rubber-stamp a war first.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        That’s some very antiquated and naive logic. NONE of these conflicts involved a formal declaration of war:

        Korean War

        Vietnam War

        Persian Gulf

        Afghanistan

        Iraq War

        So you’re going to tell me we weren’t at war for any of those? Bullshit. There’s been plenty of work for a Department of War in the US since WW2.

        • GreenShimada@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I mean that after WWII, the public sentiment was “We’re done with war. Whew!” That’s exactly why officially declaring war and using the war powers workaround was used in ever example you gave.

          It was the Department of War for 150 years before 1947 when Truman changed the name.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Terrible 1984 reference. Maybe if this dude was asking for a department of peace.

      If you think the state supports truth and love like it supports offensive wars, I have bad news for you.

    • logicbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      When I started reading the quote, I assumed it was a joke, just from the format, not the content. When I got to the part where it said, “It used to be called the Department of War and it had a stronger sound,” I felt the typical disgust and contempt I usually feel when listening to Trump, and so I knew it was almost certainly a genuine quote.

    • Harvey656@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      It’s real, sadly, I watched it, my parents in law was watching the stupid statement and I joined them. It was yuck

    • L7HM77@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Judaic heaven might actually be hell for him. Sparsely populated grassy knolls, have to walk everywhere, nothing to do but watch sheep and talk to people, and a bigger tyrant that would get pissed off if he starts trying to regain a following.