Do President Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth Really Not Know that the Department of Defense Was NEVER the Department of War or Do They Just Believe Most Americans Are Too Ignorant to Know it?

The Old Colonel has previously posted on this issue (https://old-soldier-colonel.blogspot.com/2025/09/once-again-washington-post-demonstrates.html) but on 11 November 2025 I watched on CSPAN (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS0nTgU5TP0) President Trump’s Veterans Day remarks at Arlington National Cemetery and once again he needs to either stop with his revisionist history or somebody needs to give him a history lesson because he repeated his misinformation that he changed the name of the Department of Defense back to the Department of War. The Department of Defense has  NEVER been named the Department of War, NEVER! Here are the FACTS:

Shortly after the establishment of a government under President George Washington in 1789, Congress established the War Department as a civilian agency to administer the field army under the president (as commander-in-chief) and the Secretary of War as a member of the Cabinet. The Department of War also had responsibility for naval affairs from 1794 until the establishment of the Department of the Navy in 1798.

By the National Security Act of 1947, the Department of the Navy and the Department of War had a new single Secretary imposed over the top of their two previously independent Cabinet secretaries. THE DEPARTMENT OF WAR CHANGED ITS NAME TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY and split off the Department of the Air Force. The new Cabinet-level department was initially designated the National Military Establishment (NME). In 1949, the NME was renamed the Department of Defense.

On 5 September 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order authorizing "Department of War" and "Secretary of War" as SECONDARY titles to the main titles of "Department of Defense" and "Secretary of Defense." The terms must be accommodated by federal agencies and are ONLY permitted in executive branch communications, ceremonial settings, and non-statutory documents. ONLY an act of Congress can legally and formally change the department's name and secretary's title, so "Department of Defense" and "Secretary of Defense" remain the ONLY legally official names and titles.

Trump Administration Sending Ukrainian Draft Eligible Draft Dodgers in the US Back Home to Face Conscription

This Article appeared in the Washington Post just after Veterans Day and highlighted the number of Draft eligible Ukrainian Draft Dodgers that have escaped to the United States and the Trump Administration's efforts to "repatriate" them back to their home country so they can have the privilege and honor of participating in their country's struggle against evil Russian invaders.  Contrary to how Canada harbored American Deserters and Draft Dodgers during the Vietnam War, this administration is doing the right thing sending these guys home to do their duty.  What is surprising is the number of commenters in the article's comment section that seem to condone these shirkers conduct and criticized the administration for sending them home to face conscription.

Below are some selected passages from the article that provides the essence of the issues but I have included a link to the article for those that wish to read the entire article.  Also, below that I have posted the Old Colonel's comment so you can see my sentiments on the issue.  Enjoy! 

Trump officials preparing to deport some Ukrainians despite conscription fears Deportations to Ukraine have declined in recent years. An adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky said, “We’ll find good use for them.”

By Maria Sacchetti, Marianne LeVine, Siobhán O'Grady and John Hudson 
Washington Post 14 November 2025

Here are some selected paragraphs from the article but you can read the entire article at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/11/14/ukraine-deportations-trump-zelensky/

The Trump administration is preparing to deport some Ukrainians with final orders of removal back to their war-ravaged homeland as the government seeks to ramp up deportations and Ukraine moves to tighten its relationship with Washington.

Ukraine has a history of not fully cooperating with U.S. efforts to remove certain immigrants .... But that may be changing as Ukraine strains to fend off Russian attacks, recruit soldiers and retain support from the U.S. government.

“The U.S. can deport as many as they want,” said an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a policy matter. “We’ll find good use for them.”

"Ukraine is a war zone, is currently under martial law, and it is likely that any deportees will be forcibly drafted into the army and sent to the front where they face a high likelihood of death.”

"Ukrainian men between the ages of 18 and 60 are required to register with military recruitment offices. Men older than 22 are not allowed to leave the country except under extenuating circumstances."

 The Old Soldiers Washington Post comments section comment on this article:

The US should deport any legal citizen of any foreign country who is in the US for the purpose of avoiding Military conscription. The United States should have levied sanctions on Canada for not extraditing but instead granting asylum to US Draft Dodgers and Deserters fleeing from the possibility of having to fight for this Country in Vietnam.

I remember in 1968 I was a young Army 2LT at home on leave en route to Vietnam and my father was just retiring after 30 years in the Military. The family was relocating from Northern Virginia for my father’s new civilian job and they had put their house up for rent. While I was there in Civies a Vietnamese family with their two draft age kids came to look at the house and had the chutzpah to mention they had come to the United States so their kids could avoid ARVN conscription. I’ve never seen my father so mad or rude in all my life. Here his kid was heading off to Vietnam as an Infantry Lieutenant to fight for their country while their kids were Draft Dodging to shirk their responsibility to fight for their own country. To say my Dad unceremoniously threw them out would be putting it too mildly.

Surprise! Surprise! Trump Didn't Win the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize But Should He Really Care - After Obama Winning It, It’s "No Big Deal!"

A 9 October 2025 Washington Post (WaPo) article had this headline: “Trump wants a Nobel Prize. He’ll learn Friday if his campaign paid off” (https://www.washingtonpost.com//politics/2025/10/09/trump-nobel-prize-friday/) and stated: “President Donald Trump’s long quest for a Nobel Peace Prize has sparked an unusual global scramble.… Of all the golden glories that Donald Trump has accumulated — the statues, sneakers, even a golden pager — one gleaming medallion has eluded the 79-year-old president: the Nobel Peace Prize.“ 

This piece was followed by this WaPo article “Donald Trump and peace in the Mideast” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/10/09/gaza-israel-hamas-peace-plan-trump/) containing this passage: “if the deal holds, Trump can legitimately bolster his claim to be a peacemaker worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.” 

Finally, the suspense was broken on 10 October when the WaPo published this article “María Corina Machado, Venezuelan opposition leader, wins Nobel Peace Prize” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/10/10/maria-machado-nobel-peace-prize-venezuela/) revealing that Trump didn’t win and said: “The prize honored Machado, who is in hiding, for keeping ‘the flame of democracy burning,’ but the White House accused the Nobel jury of “placing politics over peace.” The article went on to say: “… the Venezuelan opposition leader has become a symbol of democratic resistance against an increasingly authoritarian regime, even as she has been forced into hiding and barred from holding public office.”

Regardless, what I still don’t understand is why anyone, especially President Donald J. Trump, would even want the Peace Prize after the way the Norwegian Nobel Committee cheapened it by turning it into a “participation trophy” with their 2009 award.

On 9 October 2009 after a mere 263 days in office, the Nobel Committee announced the award of their “prestigious” Peace Prize to President Obama, citing his promotion of nuclear nonproliferation and a "new climate" in international relations especially in reaching out to the Muslim world. In a USA Today/Gallup Poll conducted 16-19 October, 61% of American adults polled responded that they thought Obama did not deserve to win the prize. 

WaPo columnist Michael Gerson wrote at the time that the committee members "have forfeited any claim to seriousness. Peace—the kind of peace that keeps people from being killed and oppressed—is an achievement, not a sentiment. ... Intending to honor Obama, the committee has actually embarrassed him."

The WaPo news analyst Dan Balz wrote: "Even among his supporters there was a sense of surprise and even shock on Friday [the day of the announcement], a belief that the award was premature, a disservice and a potential liability."

A WaPo editorial began, "’It's an odd Nobel Peace Prize that almost makes you embarrassed for the honoree’, and compared the Nobel Committee's statement that Obama had "created a new climate in international politics" to a recent satirical skit on television.”

Finally, this 11 October WaPo article after the winner was announced:

“For U.S. presidents, Nobel Peace Prize long fraught with politics“
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/11/trump-nobel-peace-prize-presidents/) Said: “Trump and his allies campaigned for an award that has frequently been used to send a message as well as bestow an honor.” and included this “In 2009, Barack Obama won it only months into his presidency, but the prize — which cited his ‘vision’ and ‘extraordinary efforts’ — was more a mark of aspiration than achievement by the first Black president in U.S. history. When late-night host Stephen Colbert asked Obama what he had actually done at that point to earn it, and the president deadpanned: ‘To be honest, I still don’t know.’”

When the WaPo is speaking this disparagingly about an award, even one like the ONCE prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, then it really has become “No Big Deal” except for maybe the $1.2 Million and trophy/paperweight that goes with winning.

Once Again the Washington Post Demonstrates Their Complete Ignorance of ALL Things Military by Claiming the Department of War Became the Department of Defense in 1949

 

On 26 August 2025 the Washington Post (WaPo) ran this article erroneously claiming that the Department of War became the Department of Defense in 1949:

Trump wants a ‘Department of War.’ Here’s why it’s not called that anymore

By Andrew Jeong August 26, 2025

“The Department of War was renamed the Department of Defense under President Harry S. Truman …. After World War II ended in 1945, Truman orchestrated a broad reorganization of the old War Department — which became the Defense Department in 1949.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2025/08/26/trump-war-department-defense-rename/

Then On 4 September the WaPo doubled down on its error with this article containing the same misinformation although worded a little differently:

Trump to rebrand Defense Department as War Department

By Tara Copp and Natalie Allison, 4 September 2025 7:48 p.m. ET

“…. Following World War II, the War Department was temporarily renamed the National Military Establishment. A 1949 amendment renamed the agency once again to its current name, the Department of Defense.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/09/04/trump-war-department/

With this amount of misinformation in these articles, the WaPo clearly demonstrates that they are as totally ignorant about ALL thing Military as Trump and Hegseth appear to be. I have included the links to each of these articles so skeptics of The Old Colonel can see for themselves that he is not exaggerating. Now the inconvenient FACTS:

The Department of War was what is now the Department of the Army from 1798 to 1947. During that time both the Department of War and the Department of the Navy were full members of the President’s Cabinet.

On 26 July 1947, Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947, which established the National Military Establishment (NME) and created the National Security Council, National Security Resources Board, United States Air Force, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The NME was placed under the control of the new post of secretary of defense. The National Military Establishment became operational on 18 September 1947 and was renamed the "Department of Defense” on 10 August 1949, when it absorbed the formerly cabinet-level military departments. Now the Department of the Army, Department of the Navy (containing the Navy and Marine Corps) and the Department of the Air Force (containing the Air Force and Space Force) are subordinate to the Secretary of Defense who is the only one in the President’s Cabinet.

If Trump really wants to recreate the Department of War, he should eliminate the entire Department of Defense and elevate the Departments of War, Navy and Air Force back to being Members of his Cabinet.

"Nat Turner, Black Prophet: A Visionary History" - Conflicting History as Taught in the 1950s in the 7th Grade Virginia History Textbook and Modern Revised History, Does It Make a Difference to the Bottom Line?

This article appeared in the Washington Post Book Section this past week and my immediate reaction was expressed in my below comment in the article’s comments section.  My initial reaction to reading the synopsis of this new book declaring Nat Turner a “Black Prophet” and a “Visionary” was this account clashes with what I had learned in my 7^th Grade Virginia History class in Southside Virginia in the 1959, which I initially interpreted to show how far we had come as a society since back then. Then Turner was portrayed as a poor dumb slave that led a revolt leading other slave to slaughter White people in the mistaken believe he was leading his followers to the biblical Promised Land of Jerusalem. At that time the County Seat of Southampton County, Virginia was named Jerusalem but has since been renamed Courtland. We were taught that Turner was so ignorant that he mistakenly thought the County Seat was the same Jerusalem as the one in the Bible.

After reflecting on this more, I have come to realize it’s not really important which narrative was correct, my 7^th grade textbook or this paperback, what was important is that Nat Turner realized slavery was not right and he took steps to correct it, steps that made an important statement which cost him his life.

14 new paperbacks that hit shelves in August

The month’s notable new releases include the latest novels by Elizabeth Strout and Louis Bayard, a biography of Audre Lorde, and the account of a hostage crisis in London.

August 15, 2025

https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2025/08/15/new-recommended-paperback-releases/

Black history

‘Nat Turner, Black Prophet: A Visionary History’ by Anthony E. Kaye and Gregory P. Downs

Turner blazed into the American history books in 1831, when he led an uprising of enslaved people in Virginia that killed at least 55 White people, the bloodiest such insurrection in U.S. history. This heartfelt, meticulous account, which plants him in the world of early-19th-century American Methodism, centers his self-conception as a prophet with visions and as a general prosecuting a war with biblical resonance.

14 new paperbacks that hit shelves in August - Comments

This treatment of the Nat Turner rebellion shows how far history has evolved since I attended school is Southeast Virginia in the late 1950s - early 60’s. History then portrayed Turner as a poor dumb slave with a rudimentary knowledge of the Bible who read some weather conditions as a sign from the heavens to go on a murdering rampage leading his followers to “the Promised Land” which he believed was the biblical town of Jerusalem. Unfortunately, the County Seat of Southampton County, the location of the rebellion, was then named “Jerusalem” (now Courtland) which Turner mistakenly thought was the same Jerusalem in the Bible. And that’s how history was taught in Southeast Virginia under the Byrd Machine back when Virginia schools were still segregated. Don’t laugh but that’s how the 7th grade mandatory Virginia history class was taught back then and shows how far we have come.

Another Misleading Washington Post Headline and Article: Hegseth removes first female superintendent in shake-up at Naval Academy - Actually He Moved VADM Davids to a More Prestigious and Important Position

 

Once again and in typical Washington Post/WaPo fashion, the WaPo is sensationalizing a headline to mislead readers into thinking the Trump Administrations is attempting to do something untoward, nefarious and discriminatory when in fact, once all the facts are revealed, nothing could be further from the truth. If the WaPo were to be accurate, this would have been a more honest Headline for this article:

Hegseth moves first woman Naval Academy superintendent to be first woman Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Operations, Plans & Strategy, the Navy Department’s third most important position.

Rather than this, the WaPo leads off the article making it sound like Defense Secretary Hegseth is shuffling Vice Admiral Yvette Davids off to oblivion instead of to a far more impactful, prestigious and influential position. Most Naval Officers would view this as a promotion with excellent potential for getting a Fourth Star. In her present position of what is in essence the “small college president,” VADM Davids would by law have to retire once her tenure was over. Several commenters counter with she will need a waiver now anyway so why didn’t Hegseth just wait until her Academy tour was completed in two years and appoint her to the DCNO position and get her the waiver then. It’s probably because that prestigious DCNO will NOT be open in two years, it’s open now.

Although an astute and Military knowledgeable WaPo reader might be able to deduce the truth from reading what is buried further down in the article, the WaPo does a very good job of hiding and obscuring it. As a result, article commenters are extremely critical of the move and have been misled into believing VADM Davids has been unceremoniously fired.

One other extremely relevant FACT the WaPo conveniently omitted from the article is that VADM Yvette David’s’ husband is RADM (Retired) Keith B. Davids, a Navy special warfare SEAL who commanded the Naval Special Warfare Command from 2022 to 2024 and the U.S. Special Operations Command South, United States Southern Command from 2020 to 2022. He was Trump’s White House Military Office Director during his first term and Trump even promoted him to Rear Admiral. He is still extremely close with Trump and reportedly on his short list to be recalled to active duty as the next Chief of Naval Operations.

Here is enough of the WaPo article to gleam the relevant information but I’ll include the link below to the actual article for those that wish to read it in its entirety.

 

Hegseth removes first female superintendent in shake-up at Naval Academy

Vice Adm. Yvette Davids has been nominated for another position in the Navy. Her expected replacement, Lt. Gen. Michael Borgschulte, would be the first Marine Corps officer to lead the institution.

By Dan Lamothe  Updated 18 July 2025

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will replace the first woman to lead the U.S. Naval Academy, defense officials said, with the Trump administration nominating a Marine Corps general to oversee the institution for the first time in its nearly 180-year history.

Vice Adm. Yvette Davids has led the Naval Academy since January 2024, and is about 18 months into serving in a job that typically rotates about every three to four years. Hegseth said Friday in a statement that President Donald Trump has selected Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Michael Borgschulte, who oversees personnel issues for his service as deputy commandant for Manpower and Reserve Affairs in Quantico, Virginia, to replace her.

The unexpected decision comes as Trump, with Hegseth in the lead, has purged the military of numerous top military leaders — including a disproportionate number of women — whom they have accused of focusing too heavily on diversity. Since taking office in January, they have ousted the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top admirals in the Coast Guard and the Navy, the No. 2 officer in the Air Force, and several top military lawyers.

But the replacement of Davids is different from those decisions because, rather than retire, she will instead be nominated to serve in another role as a three-star admiral, overseeing naval operations, plans, strategy and warfighting development as a deputy chief of naval operations, a defense official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the impending move. That decision, also listed in a Pentagon announcement Friday, is technically a lateral move, and she was competitively selected for it with Trump’s approval. If confirmed by the Senate, she will replace Vice Adm. Daniel Dwyer, who is expected to retire.

…. It was not immediately clear whether Davids voluntarily initiated her early departure from the prestigious Naval Academy posting…. Highlighting the unusual nature of the shake-up, the superintendent of a service academy, by law, typically must retire after serving in the position.

This is the jest of the article but for those that want to read the entire article, I’ll include the link to it here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/07/18/yvette-davids-naval-academy-hegseth/

The Old Colonel’s Washington Post Comment:

The ignorance of all things Military on display here by WaPo commenters is breathtaking. VADM Davids is getting promoted from the relatively insignificant job of “small college president” to being the DCNO Operations, Plans & Strategy (N3/N5) of the entire United States Navy, unquestionably the third most impactful, prestigious, important and influential Naval position in the Pentagon and often a stepping stone to a Fourth Star. Academy Sup is what is recognized as a “terminal swan song assignment.” Are the vast majority of WaPo commenters really this stupid?

For those commenters that complained that this has never happened to a Naval Academy Sup before, I would point out that never before has the Naval Academy Sup been the wife of a Navy Admiral who during Trump’s first term was his Director of the White House Military Office and who Biden shuffled out immediately to another job, than retired him on his way out of office in 2024. Her husband is close to Trump and this could be a payoff to him by getting her that Fourth Star.

The Senate confirmations:

2025-07-31 PN418 Marine Corps

Lt. Gen. Michael J. Borgschulte, to be Lieutenant General

2025-07-31 PN419 Navy

Vice Adm. Yvette M. Davids, to be Vice Admiral

The Old Colonel's Reaction and Comment to the Washington Post Article About the Trump Ukrainian Weapons Freeze - The Old Colonel Believes in Supporting the Fight to the Last Ukranian

 Opinion

Trump’s Ukraine weapons freeze is GOP coalition management

The U.S. can’t meet all its global commitments, and Trump is making political choices accordingly.

Jason Willick  4 July 2025

A few weeks ago, President Donald Trump devastated the anti-interventionists in his political base by not only condoning Israel’s assault on Iran but also ultimately joining with the U.S. Air Force. Traditional Republican advocates of muscular foreign policy exulted. But this week, Trump disappointed hawks by freezing shipments of key weapons to a different American ally, Ukraine, as it resists Russia’s invasion.

On their face, the two policies seem inconsistent. In fact, they are two sides of the same coin. The central challenge in American foreign policy today is that Washington’s defense commitments around the world exceed its military power. This is known as the “Lippmann gap,” for journalist Walter Lippmann, who popularized the concept in 1943.

The Lippmann gap pressures presidents to make trade-offs between competing foreign policy priorities. If they don’t, the gap will grow. For Trump, backing Israel to the hilt while leaving Ukraine more exposed has a clear — if brutal — political and strategic appeal.

The Pentagon might have frozen certain weapons shipments to Ukraine even if the Israel-Iran conflict hadn’t happened. But the proximity of the decisions underscores that conflicts in different regions can draw resources away from one another. The most precious commodity is air defense — the ability to shoot down incoming aircraft and missiles.

The Pentagon is reportedly halting the delivery of Patriot missiles to Ukraine, which relies on the U.S.-made weapons to defend its cities from Russian aerial attacks…..”

The Article goes on to explain the reason for making this tradeoff decision and you can read the WaPo article in its entirety at this link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/04/ukraine-weapons-freeze-trump-israel/

The Old Colonel strongly disagrees with the Trump decision to stop or even to cut back on weapons shipments to the Ukraine, especially after we’ve already made an almost 80 year and multi-Trillion dollar investment in neutering first the old Soviet Union and now Russia. Now that we’ve got our surrogate Ukraine seriously reducing Russia as a threat to us, it’s NOT the time to let up on them. Hence, when the Old Colonel read this WaPo article, he immediately posted this below comment in the article’s comment section. The WaPo did have the good sense to make it one of the featured comments for the article.

The Old Colonel’s Washington Post Comment:

From Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 to now the United States has allocated $182.8 Billion in emergency funding for the region but has actually only disbursed $83.4 Billion in funding and equipment, some of which Ukraine will have to repay with added interest. When you consider the US spent $8 to $9 Trillion (with a “T” that doesn’t account for inflation) countering Russia/USSR during the Cold War, then the modest $83.4 Billion we’ve provided the Ukraine so far is pocket change. For that mere $83.4 Billion we have reduced the Russians to a fifth rate military power if you don’t count Nucs and even needing help from North Korea. What’s not to like? Estimates are we may eventually spend maybe ~$200B and that’s still a bargain. Personally, I’m in favor of continuing the fight to the last Ukrainian and I’m even in favor of having them begin a fight with China and maybe Iran and North Korea to decimate them too.                                                                                                                       

All that said, I do believe that former CJCS GEN Milley pegged it right from the beginning that neither the Russians or Ukrainians are going to win this and the only resolution will be negotiated. Putin isn’t going to give in and lose face no matter what it takes and the Ukrainians have slowed them down but will never defeat Russia. I think in the end the Russians will keep Crimea and maybe a sliver of Eastern Ukraine. As for Crimea, it was really historically part of Mother Russia and the USSR put it under the Ukraine in about 1954 for ease of administration back when the Ukraine was as much a part of the USSR as California is part of the US so they will never give Crimea back.

Of emergency aid for Ukraine since 2022, Congress has allocated but NOT spent the following resources to the cause:

·         68% ($123.9 billion) to the Department of Defense (DOD)

·         22% ($39.9 billion) to the US Agency for International Development (USAID)

·         6% ($11.6 billion) to the State Department

·         4% ($7.4 billion) to other agencies including the International Development Finance Corporation, Department of Health and Human Services, Treasury, and Department of Energy