'Light money on fire': Trump blasted over sky-high cost of 'symbolic stunt'
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with the media on the day of the signing of an executive order to rename the Department of Defense the "Department of War", with the bust of Abraham Lincoln in the foreground, in the Oval Office, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 5, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

The cost of President Donald Trump's drive to rename the Department of Defense could be billions of dollars, according to a new report in The Atlantic.

Trump declared the department would now also be known as the Department of War — a change that he would need Congressional approval if it was to become a permanent replacement. It seems in stark contrast to his pursuit of the Nobel Peace Prize, The Atlantic reported.

The violent rhetoric was backed up in a recent social media post, Trump shared a meme referencing "Apocalypse Now," replacing the film's original quote with "I love the smell of deportations in the morning" and dubbing his potential military intervention in Chicago "Chipocalypse Now.

The president's inflammatory language represents a troubling escalation of violent discourse, The Atlantic's David A. Graham wrote. After deploying National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., and Marines to Los Angeles, Trump has continued to threaten military intervention in American cities. Despite later claiming his Chicago post was "fake news," the underlying message of potential urban military action remains deeply concerning.

Trump's attraction to martial imagery is notable, especially considering he obtained five draft deferments during the Vietnam War, wrote Graham.

Last week, he signed an executive order rebranding the Defense Department as the "Department of War" — a move that's not officially recognized but which will cost millions — if not billions — in rebranding, Graham wrote.

"He can’t legally rename it without Congress’s permission, and the cost of changing the branding could reportedly run into millions or billions of dollars. Either he means it or he’s willing to light money on fire for a symbolic stunt," he wrote.

"Neither is good."

This isn't a new pattern for Trump. Throughout his political career, he has consistently employed aggressive rhetoric. During his first campaign, he encouraged rally attendees to physically confront protesters. As president, he has urged police to treat suspects brutally and famously encouraged supporters to "fight like hell" - rhetoric that ultimately contributed to the January 6th Capitol riot.

The administration's militaristic tendencies extend beyond domestic rhetoric. The U.S. military recently attacked and destroyed a Venezuelan boat, with Vice President J.D. Vance callously stating, "Killing cartel members who poison our fellow citizens is the highest and best use of our military." This statement drew sharp criticism from Senator Rand Paul, who condemned the glorification of extrajudicial killing.

Philosopher Hannah Arendt's concept of the "imperial boomerang" provides critical context, Trump wrote. This theory suggests that repressive tactics used internationally can eventually be turned inward against a domestic population. Trump's actions - from military parades to threatening urban interventions - seem to manifest this very concern.

The administration's comfort with violent language is perhaps best exemplified by recent reports of internal conflicts, such as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's profanity-laden threat to punch a fellow official "in the f---ing face" during a social gathering.