The Washington Post's editorial board earned fierce derision from critics Friday evening after it defended the Trump administration's bid to revert the Department of Defense back to its former name, Department of War.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday directing the Department of Defense to be known as the "Department of War" in official communications and government usage. The name had been used until the 1940s and is intended to signal a return to what Trump has dubbed a “warrior ethos” in the military. The legal name of the department can only be changed by an act of Congress.
Reacting Friday, the Post's editorial board called the rebranding a "worthy blow against government euphemism," arguing that euphemisms "distort thought."
"Perhaps it can be followed by clearer thinking about the military’s role at home and abroad," the board wrote.
The editors said it's "more delicate" to assert the Pentagon is dedicated to defense over war, "but the former depends on the latter."
"The extent to which the Pentagon can defend U.S. interests around the world is tied to the expectation that the United States can fight and win wars. That expectation is what shapes the calculations of rival states," the board said.
The editors argued that terms including "defense" and "security" have a tendency for "bureaucratic mission creep." They pointed to the Biden administration's defense strategy that mentioned climate nearly 20 times. By stripping out "defense," they said, people may realize National Guard troops aren't police officers who can be sent into cities — they're soldiers.
"Trump’s opponents complain about the aggressive connotations of the new name. But the United States is protected by the most lethal and vigilant fighting force ever assembled, no matter what it’s called. The new name could prompt more focused debate about how to use it," they concluded.
Critics laid into the Post, with many blaming the editorial on its owner, Jeff Bezos, who has cozied up to Trump in recent months.
Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) wrote on X, "It’s crazy how much Bezos and @washingtonpost are eager to just kiss Trumps A."
Film producer and writer David Grover added, "Exactly why I cancelled my sub last year. I feel sorry for the passionate journalists that work there and sometimes wish I could read their work, but i will never pay a cent to read a WaPo article."
Voting rights advocate and Democracy Docket founder Marc Elias wrote on Bluesky, "This one is just too easy. But here it is.... Washington Post's latest editorial vs my latest for Democracy Docket. Support the media outlets that share your values."
Brian P. McKeon wrote on X, "The Wash Post ed board naively thinks the name change to War Department will change behavior in Washington. LOL. 'The new name could prompt more focused debate about how to use it.'"
Journalist Bastian Brauns wrote in a translated X post, "Oh, the Washington Post Editorial Board defends the renaming to 'Department of War'. 'Defense' is a euphemism, that's the argument. Now we know why the opinion page editors left, after the owner, Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, endorsed Trump."
National security attorney Anthony Michael Kreis wrote on Bluesky, "The Washington Post’s editorial board is worthless. Just turn the lights off."
He added, "Defense is not a euphemism ffs."
Audie Klotz, an expert on international relations, added on Bluesky, "Are they (WaPo) next going to address euphemisms such as ‘pro-life?’"
Marine veteran and writer Peter Lucier wrote on Bluesky, "The parlor-room Machiavellis of the WaPo editorial board, these porch pundit, pseudo-sage, self-satisfied bloviators; Imagining themselves measured and wise while arguing against Marshall, Forrestal, Acheson, Kennan,Vandenberg, Bradley, Lovett,Clifford, McCloy, Harriman, Bohlen, Nitze, and Souers."
