Over hill, over dale
As we hit the dusty path,
And the Caissons go rolling alongside.
Out and in, hear them shout,
Counter march and proper about,
And the Caissons go rolling alongside.Then it’s hello! hello! hee!
Within the discipline artillery,
Shout out your numbers loud and robust,
For the place e’er you go,
You’ll all the time know
That the Caissons go rolling alongside.
—Main Edmund L. Gruber
Simply earlier than the homicide of Charlie Kirk drove it off the entrance pages, President Donald Trump’s newest manner of annoying his foes was introduced: the change of identify of the Division of Protection to the Division of Battle. This was declared in an Government Order of September 5, 2025, wherein the aim of the change was defined:
Orthodox. Devoted. Free.
Signal as much as get Disaster articles delivered to your inbox every day
On August 7, 1789, 236 years in the past, President George Washington signed into legislation a invoice establishing america Division of Battle to supervise the operation and upkeep of navy and naval affairs. It was underneath this identify that the Division of Battle, together with the later shaped Division of the Navy, gained the Battle of 1812, World Battle I, and World Battle II, inspiring awe and confidence in our Nation’s navy, and making certain freedom and prosperity for all Individuals. The Founders selected this identify to sign our power and resolve to the world. The identify “Division of Battle,” greater than the present “Division of Protection,” ensures peace by means of power, because it demonstrates our capacity and willingness to battle and win wars on behalf of our Nation at a second’s discover, not simply to defend. This identify sharpens the Division’s give attention to our personal nationwide curiosity and our adversaries’ give attention to our willingness and availability to wage conflict to safe what’s ours. I’ve due to this fact decided that this Division ought to as soon as once more be often called the Division of Battle and the Secretary must be often called the Secretary of Battle.
When signing the doc, Trump declared that the change was a part of a shift away from a “woke” ideology inside the division; it could usher in a interval of navy victory. The president added,
So we gained the First World Battle. We gained the Second World Battle. We gained every thing earlier than that and in between. After which we determined to go woke, and we modified the identify to Division of Protection. We should always have gained all over the place. We might have gained each conflict, however we actually selected to be very politically appropriate or woke. And we simply battle endlessly. We wouldn’t lose actually. We’d simply battle. Type of tie. We by no means wished to win—wars that, each one in all them, we might’ve gained simply with simply a few little adjustments.
The newly redubbed Secretary of Battle, Pete Hegseth, mentioned the change was a part of “restoring the warrior ethos” and that
The Battle Division goes to battle decisively, not countless conflicts. It’s going to battle to win, not to not lose. We’re going to go on offense, not simply on protection. Most lethality, not tepid legality. Violent impact, not politically appropriate.
After all, as could be anticipated with something that Trump does, there was a right away hostile response. Typical was that of Judith Levine in The Guardian:
Trump’s Division of Battle burnishes his vainness, however it isn’t only a vainness challenge. It’s extravagantly costly. It’s going to occupy US cities. And now, in phrase as in deed, it celebrates the nation and the president as aggressor, conqueror, unrestrained worldwide lawbreaker and flouter of something so “woke” as peace.
Actually, estimates of the bills the change shall require ran as excessive as one billion—though this can’t appear that top to a authorities that, no matter administration, has thrown round billions for many years.
Provided that—as is common at present—each side are dealing in hyperbole, is there in any actuality a person who’s neither a devotee nor a hater of Trump to garner? There may be, however we should return to when the identify change began—and most significantly to Harry Truman. The Battle Division had been accountable for america Military since 1789, as Trump’s govt order rightly remembers. In 1798, a separate and equal govt division was shaped to cope with maritime protection: the Division of the Navy.
The beginnings of the Air Drive as a part of the Military and underneath the Battle Division return to 1907; its focus was on aviation itself. It turned, successively, the Military Air Corps after which the Military Air Drive. It was as a part of this formation that my late father served as a tail gunner with the 444th Bombardment Group towards Japan. Dad was nonetheless within the reserves when, in 1947, Truman determined to separate the Air Drive from the Military, create a brand new govt division for it, after which, as Dad described it, place one other tier of paperwork on high of the three present ones to create the Division of Protection.
Now, leaving apart for the second President Trump’s assertion that this was a type of proto-woke transfer, allow us to take a look at what really occurred. In 1950, the North Koreans invaded the South and got here near profitable. Solely fast and overwhelming reinforcement saved the scenario. Nonetheless, conflict was by no means declared; this battle was declared to be a “police motion” underneath govt authority. Furthermore, it was finally underneath United Nations command.
In time, after the Soviet Delegation returned to the U.N. (that they had walked out in protest on the worldwide physique contemplating the Korean battle, which turned out to be a mistake), the United Nations determined that, really, that they had nothing to do with it. This anomaly is mirrored formally on-line. United Nations Command Korea, underneath which our and some different international locations’ forces serve in South Korea and Japan, describes its personal historical past thusly:
Following North Korean aggression towards South Korea, United Nations Command (UNC) was established on July 24, 1950. UNC signifies the world’s first try at collective safety underneath the United Nations system. United Nations Safety Council Resolutions 83 and 84 supplied the worldwide authorized authority for member states to revive peace on the Korean Peninsula, they usually designated america because the chief of the unified command we all know as UN Command. From 1950 to 1953, twenty-two international locations contributed both fight forces or medical items to help South Korea underneath the United Nations flag. At the moment, UNC continues its unbroken dedication to safe a long-lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula by implementing the Armistice Settlement, facilitating diplomacy with North Korea, and serving because the integrator for multinational forces throughout disaster or battle.
Nevertheless it doesn’t accomplish that as an company of the United Nations. As U.N. Secretary Common Boutros Boutros-Ghali wrote to the North Korean Overseas Minister in 1994:
the Safety Council didn’t set up the unified command as a subsidiary organ underneath its management, however merely really helpful the creation of such a command, specifying that or not it’s underneath the authority of america. Subsequently, the dissolution of the unified command doesn’t fall inside the duty of any United Nations organ however is a matter inside the competence of the Authorities of america.
There was no such cowl for our subsequent police actions in Vietnam and elsewhere.
This nation has not fought a declared conflict since 1945; nor has it gained any of the conflicts it did battle, in the long term. Col. Joseph Posz, my navy historical past teacher at pricey previous New Mexico Navy Institute and a distinguished Vietnam vet, used to grimly joke again in 1979 that the distinction between a conflict and a police motion was that one doesn’t actually get killed or wounded in a police motion. However in a extra critical vein, addressing the undeniable fact that the U.S. Military had carried out somewhat poorly after World Battle II—apart from elite items just like the Particular Forces and Rangers—he referred to as the category’s consideration to a ebook titled Crisis in Command, by Richard A. Gabriel and Paul L. Savage.
The authors blamed the decline within the Military’s efficiency on the importation of the careerist company govt mentality into the Officer Corps within the wake of World Battle II (one may argue that it additionally made its manner into different areas it didn’t belong, such because the priesthood, however that’s one other subject). Within the a long time since, there have been sporadic makes an attempt—particularly underneath President Reagan—to deal with these points. However in recent times, this enervating affect, mixed with tried politicization and wokery, have weakened the forces even additional. However addressing the latter—which Trump clearly means to do—with out tackling the previous, will depart the issue intact.
As as to whether the change in identify will accomplish something, I can’t say. I want to hope that the reversion to Battle Division can even imply an finish to unconstitutional “police actions” waged on govt authority with occasional congressional cartes blanches utilized, somewhat than authorized wars. However that might require a serious rethinking a few return to constitutional authorities—a feat of which it might be doubted that both celebration is succesful. On the very least, we’d provide you with a extra practical description than “police motion.”
It reminds this author of George Carlin’s remark a few frequent battlefield situation. Dubbed “Shell Shock” within the First World Battle, its sobriquet was softened to “Battle Fatigue” within the Second. In Vietnam, in flip, it was additional euphemized to “Publish-Traumatic Stress Dysfunction.” As Carlin caustically noticed in conclusion, “Perhaps if we nonetheless referred to as it Shell Shock, the poor SOBs might lastly get the care they deserve.” In comparable smart, maybe we must always name Police Actions “Extralegal Warfare.”
Pondering past all of this, there’s additionally one other new merchandise which leads me to surprise concerning the monetary acumen of these at present operating the armed forces underneath this administration. As reported in Navy.com for July 9, 2025:
The Military is shifting to dismantle the majority of its horse items, a part of a broader push by service planners to eradicate applications they see as peripheral to the core mission of combating and coaching for wars.
The Military will start phasing out 5 horse-mounted ceremonial items stationed at Fort Irwin, California; Fort Huachuca, Arizona; Fort Riley, Kansas; Fort Sill, Oklahoma; and Fort Cavazos Texas, Steve Warren, a service spokesperson, informed reporters Tuesday.
The choice impacts 141 horses at present used for ceremonial occasions and different pageantry, traditions that hint again to the Military’s cavalry roots however don’t have any operational function in at present’s power. All the horses are anticipated to be positioned for adoption.
The Military Instances quoted the identical spokesperson as saying, “The Military estimates that closing down the items will save about $2 million a 12 months, and the adjustments are being made as a part of its total warfighting realignment.”
Whereas Navy.com did admit that it had been essential to throw collectively scratch horse items for fight in Afghanistan, the emphasis was on the shortage of utility of the horse in fashionable conflict. The large impression on morale in each the military posts affected and their native communities was utterly ignored. Past that, as many mounted police items—whether or not ceremonial or sensible—have skilled, there’s something stirring, one thing paying homage to chivalry and valor in mounted cavalry that’s current nowhere else. The truth that these items are being disbanded is proof that the company mentality derided by Gabriel and Savage again in 1979 is alive and nicely in 2025.
If the powers that be in Washington suppose that one billion {dollars} shouldn’t be an excessive amount of to spend on a enterprise that will or could not elevate morale and assist instill a “warrior ethos” however that two million is an excessive amount of in supporting a program that has proven repeatedly its efficacy in selling these very issues, what are we to think about their total competence in navy issues typically? On the very least, they’re exhibiting themselves to be penny-wise and pound-foolish.
