logoalt Hacker News

bastawhizyesterday at 6:42 PM25 repliesview on HN

> They are U.S. defense contractors at an U.S. defense company.

We should stop using the word "defense". They're war contractors at a war company.

The Department of Defense is the Department of War. They changed the name and then immediately started taking military action against other countries. We're in a war in Iran for reasons that nobody can quite articulate, but it certainly has nothing to do with "defending" the country.


Replies

throw0101dyesterday at 6:56 PM

On the changes to US military organization and thinking post-WW2 (and the name change):

> […] The United States has a Department of Defense for a reason. It was called the “War” Department until 1947, when the dictates of a new and more dangerous world required the creation of a much larger military organization than any in American history. Harry Truman and the American leaders who destroyed the Axis, and who now were facing the Soviet empire, realized that national security had become a larger undertaking than the previous American tradition of moving, as needed, between discrete conditions of “war” and “peace.”

> These leaders understood that America could no longer afford the isolationist luxury of militarizing itself during times of threat and then making soldiers train with wooden sticks when the storm clouds passed. Now, they knew, the security of the country would be a daily undertaking, a matter of ongoing national defense, in which the actual exercise of military force would be only part of preserving the freedom and independence of the United States and its allies.

* https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive...

The author is a retired professor from the US Naval War College:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Nichols_(academic)

show 1 reply
giancarlostorotoday at 12:48 AM

> nobody can quite articulate, but it certainly has nothing to do with "defending" the country.

It's not hard:

* They're trying to build nuclear weapons, and they're one of the worlds leading sponsor of terrorism (if not the sole leader).

* The country ran out of water, people started to protest their government, and were killed by the thousands (some say tens of thousands potentially more).

Water is one of the most basic human needs, if they're willing to kill their own people protesting for the most basic human need, what would they do with Nuclear to the rest of the world? I feel like people don't understand the gravity of Iran with nuclear.

Iran having nuclear will not end well for its citizens or the world.

show 1 reply
jghnyesterday at 9:20 PM

> The Department of Defense is the Department of War

No, it is not, at least not technically. That would require an act of Congress, which hasn't happened. Despite what the idiots "in charge" seem to believe.

show 2 replies
avaeryesterday at 9:03 PM

Should also keep in mind the secretary of war publicly stated the department's aim is "maximum lethality, not tepid legality".

Politics aside, anyone in the supply chain shouldn't be surprised they have a role in illegal killings, because that's literally what they said they're doing.

giwookyesterday at 9:45 PM

Great point. Labeling it as 'defense' instead of 'war' might be one of the more brilliant marketing tricks in the last century.

No one likes war, everyone loves defense. Something something expanded surveillance under the guise of counter-terrorism post-9/11.

show 1 reply
louiereedersonyesterday at 8:37 PM

Are they war or defense products when they are used against your own citizens?

show 2 replies
rob74yesterday at 6:57 PM

It certainly has nothing to do with defending the country the department is located in.

jfengelyesterday at 10:46 PM

Quite a few joined when it was a defense contractor, at least in name. They could at least imagine that their jobs were for defense purposes.

The name change is a harsh truth.

chrisco255yesterday at 11:07 PM

The U.S. has been taking military action against other countries since its inception, whether it was named DoD or DoW.

Forgeties79today at 1:13 AM

I was under the impression the name was not actually formally changed, just like how the “Department of government efficiency” was never actually a department but was just a rebranding of an existing department done totally by mouth (like a lot of nonsense this administration does)

Lioyesterday at 10:13 PM

> We're in a war in Iran for reasons that nobody can quite articulate,

As a third party watching I just assumed it was a “dead cat”[1] to get people to stop talking about the Epstein files.

Obviously the Iranian government are not good guys either but the timing of this war… it just looks very odd.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_cat_strategy

show 4 replies
elAhmoyesterday at 9:02 PM

The name isn't changed.

show 1 reply
deadbabeyesterday at 10:18 PM

They are war criminals participating in a war crime enterprise.

angry_octetyesterday at 8:35 PM

Let's clarify further that they are working for the clown Gestapo known as ICE, and they are enabling them to violate judicial directives and Constitutional protections for an adminstration speed running American anarcho-fascism.

Palantir used to be an effective augmentation to counter-insurgency and international terrorism.

Karp has gleefully pivoted to enabling authoritarian pogroms in American cities, and if you keep working there you have blood on your hands.

tinfoilhatteryesterday at 9:15 PM

I think the reason is quite easy to articulate - Israel.

ekianjoyesterday at 11:01 PM

> y changed the name and then immediately started taking military action against other countries

the "department of defense" has been doing military actions against other countries forever.

gib444yesterday at 6:50 PM

War and defence are the same thing in the US, so the naming doesn't really matter. To go after enemies, real or otherwise, with overwhelming force (to also the scare the ones not bombed this time), is to "defend" the US. That is how they justify it to themselves.

TheCoelacanthyesterday at 6:49 PM

Regardless of what the Trump administration will tell you, that's not it's name. The executive branch is not empowered to unilaterally change the name of a department.

show 4 replies
RickJWagneryesterday at 9:40 PM

Trump publicly mulled about going to war with Iran for weeks before it started. Iran had been killing its own citizens by thousands, stopping the massacre was a leading factor.

I am aware of one obscure Democrat that spoke out against the action at the time. I believe that man is the only one that should be criticizing the decision, because he didn’t wait on the fence to see how things turned out.

If you know of more Democrats that spoke out—- especially big name ones—- please provide credible, contemporary sources. I’ll be glad to give approval to any that acted bravely at the time.

show 1 reply
alexashkayesterday at 11:03 PM

'We' should stop using the word 'we'. :)

'We' talk is how the pseudo-educated talk down to those other people who are the problem.

michaelsshawyesterday at 7:16 PM

The US has always used its military for global terrorism. Only just now, it is more in your face. There is no doubt: the US is responsible for some of the most sickening crimes against humanity the world has ever seen, including directly being the inspiration for the Holocaust, as well as US companies providing logistics for the Holocaust!

I hate the idea that it was ever the DoD. It was always a terroristic, offensive force.

show 1 reply
Henchman21yesterday at 9:05 PM

The Iran war started to provide a distraction from the Epstein files. Let's not pretend we don't know why, or more absurdly, can't quite articulate. It's very simple.

show 1 reply
echelonyesterday at 7:09 PM

> We're in a war in Iran for reasons that nobody can quite articulate

(1) Nuclear proliferation.

We once had a deal that looked as though it was holding. Trump's nixing of the deal and the happenings in Ukraine accelerated Iran's desire to have nukes.

(2) Taiwan invasion postponement / CRINK disruption

As I've been reading, this might be a second order play to stall China's invasion of Taiwan. If China has to dip into strategic oil reserves to smooth out impact to its economy, it may forgo its Taiwan invasion plans for a bit longer.

It's also throwing a wrench into the CRINK alliance.

show 3 replies
inetknghtyesterday at 8:46 PM

> for reasons that nobody can quite articulate

I'll say them. The reasons are Trump, Vance, and Republicans.

show 2 replies
stackedinserteryesterday at 7:10 PM

> for reasons that nobody can quite articulate

They were articulated many times, maybe you didn't want to hear.

The action itself was poorly planned and executed, it's a different question.

show 5 replies