Trump set to re-establish Defense Department's 'warrior ethos' by restoring original name



President Donald Trump intends to restore the original name of the Department of Defense.

Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Friday that will designate the Department of War as the DOD's secondary title, according to a White House fact sheet obtained by Fox News Digital. The change will also name Pete Hegseth the secretary of war.

'Call the endless WARS what they are. And maybe then, we'll finally put an end to this cycle.'

Further, the order seeks to make the alteration permanent by instructing Hegseth to propose legislative and executive actions. The Trump administration plans to update public-facing websites and the Pentagon's office signage, a White House official told Fox News Digital.

The Department of War title was used for the United States' military agency until 1949.

"We won WWI, and we won WWII, not with the Department of Defense, but with a War Department, with the Department of War," Hegseth told "Fox & Friends" on Wednesday. "As the president has said, we're not just defense, we're offense."

RELATED: Tim Kaine trying to weasel a ban on Hegseth changing base names into the military budget

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

"We've re-established at the Department the warrior ethos. We want warriors, folks that understand how to exact lethality on the enemy," he continued. "We don't want endless contingencies and just playing defense. We think words and names and titles matter. So we're working with the White House and the president on it. Stand by."

Trump told reporters last week that the name change was imminent.

"We're just going to do it," Trump declared. "I'm sure Congress will go along if we need that. I don't think we even need that."

RELATED: Congress must kill DEI before it kills our military readiness

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck reacted to Trump's plans to change the agency's name.

"Renaming the Department of Defense to the Department of War would remind both the world and OURSELVES what our tax dollars are funding: Bombs will be dropped. Our children will die. I think that's what Trump is trying to do. Call the endless WARS what they are. And maybe then, we'll finally put an end to this cycle," Beck wrote in a post on social media.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tim Kaine trying to weasel a ban on Hegseth changing base names into the military budget



Democrat Senator Tim Kaine (Va.) has weaseled an amendment into the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2026 that would handcuff Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth when it comes to the naming of certain military bases and other Pentagon assets.

Erasure

The Department of Defense took part in the iconoclastic Biden-era sweep of American history that saw graves dug up, statues toppled, animals renamed, busts melted down, and church windows removed.

Pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2021 — which survived a Dec. 23, 2020, veto by President Donald Trump — former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin established a commission to identify, for the purpose of removal, "names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia to assets of the Department of Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America."

Austin ultimately embraced all of the commission's recommendations.

As a result, nine Army installations took on new names: Fort Bragg in North Carolina became Fort Liberty; Fort Benning in Georgia became Fort Moore; Fort Gordon in Georgia became Fort Eisenhower; Fort A.P. Hill in Virginia became Fort Walker; Fort Hood in Texas became Fort Cavazos; Fort Lee in Virginia became Fort Gregg-Adams; Fort Pickett in Virginia became Fort Barfoot; Fort Polk in Louisiana became Fort Johnson; and Fort Rucker in Alabama became Fort Novosel.

Restoration

These changes delighted Democrats and other leftists.

Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner (Va.), both on the Senate Armed Services Committee, were among those who celebrated the condemnation of memory, claiming in a joint statement that the name changes were "proof that progress is possible."

RELATED: Exclusive: Moses Ezekiel’s historic sculpture finally set for installation in Arlington Cemetery, by the Southern graves it once marked

Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Trump signaled a desire to reverse the changes.

Months after Hegseth restored the names of Forts Bragg and Benning, the commander in chief told a North Carolina crowd that the other seven Army installations were similarly getting their proper names back.

Among the Democrats prickled by this twist of fate was Kaine, who told reporters in June that Trump lacked the authority to make the name changes, stating, "The president can't change the law on a whim, and his court jester Pete Hegseth can't do it either."

Prohibition

The U.S. Senate plans to vote this month on its version of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.

'We learn from our triumphs and our pains, which makes our country stronger.'

The bill currently contains an amendment, section 349, which would require Hegseth to use the names of Pentagon assets in the Commonwealth of Virginia, including military bases, that were adopted by the Biden-era naming commission.

This amendment, which Kaine's office confirmed to Blaze News was the Virginia Democrat's handiwork, bars Hegseth from overriding the Virginia-specific naming recommendations of the commission.

If the NDAA 2026 is passed as is, Forts A.P. Hill, Lee, and Pickett will become Forts Walker, Gregg-Adams, and Barfoot, just as the Biden-era revisionists intended.

When pressed on whether there was a conversation about limiting this prohibition to Virginia, the office of one Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee told Blaze News, "NDAA deliberations are held at a classified level, so we cannot comment on the process involved in the inclusion of this provision."

Blaze News reached out to several Republicans on the committee to ask whether they would fight the amendment but has so far received no confirmations.

Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson said in a statement to Blaze News, "Past administrations have tried to rename bases that should [never have] been changed in the first place. Here at the Pentagon, we honor our American history and traditions; we don't erase it."

"We learn from our triumphs and our pains, which makes our country stronger," added Wilson.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Homer Simpson would be proud of this defense



Five of the seven suspects in the now-infamous Cincinnati beatdown case appeared in court Thursday for arraignments and bail hearings. It was a routine appearance — until one defense attorney made what may be the most unintentionally revealing courtroom statement of the year. Maybe even the decade.

“Vernon’s attorney, Clyde Bennett, argued that the case against his client had been inflamed due to race and politics, but in reality it was just a fight fueled by alcohol.”

The sooner we remind people that they are moral agents — capable of making choices and accountable for them — the sooner we’ll see fewer ‘Cincinnati beatdowns’ in the news.

Let that sink in for a moment. According to Bennett, it would be unfair to frame the case as racial or political. No — don’t get it twisted — it was just about drunken violence. Ah, yes, much better.

The irony is thick enough to spread on toast.

For two decades, Americans have been told everything is about race and politics. We’ve lived under a constant drumbeat of racialized news coverage. We don’t have to reach back to Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown — George Floyd in 2020 will do. Cities burned for months while the national media insisted the destruction was “mostly peaceful.”

Back then, pointing out the deadly fentanyl in Floyd’s system, the crime he’d just committed, or broader issues like high crime rates in certain neighborhoods or the role of fatherlessness in cycles of violence was “racist.” Facts didn’t matter. Only the race narrative did.

Sick of the double standard

The narrative claimed that violence disproportionately involved black men, which supposedly proved “systemic racism.” Why? Because in the Marxist worldview, crime stems from the environment — people are violent because the “system” forces them to be. If you took the same statistics and said, “Yes, something is going wrong with crime, violence, and broken families — let’s talk about it,” you were branded a racist.

It’s always been a one-way street. Race gets invoked when it advances a left-wing narrative of grievance and dependency. When it doesn’t fit, race suddenly disappears from the discussion and you’re told to drop the subject.

Americans are sick of this double standard. Racism is wrong for everyone.

The statistics show something is deeply wrong, and ignoring it won’t fix anything. But the left’s “solutions” aren’t solutions — they’re programs to stoke grievance, increase dependency, and keep personal responsibility out of the conversation. It is always someone else’s fault, and that fault is usually “whiteness.”

Which brings us back to Thursday’s courtroom gem. Bennett’s “blame it on the alcohol” defense isn’t just legally flimsy — it’s philosophically bankrupt. Being drunk while committing a crime is not a defense. You can’t rob a store, beat someone up, or kill a man and then shrug because you had one too many.

That’s not how the law works. That’s not how life works.

Choices have consequences

The bigger problem is that this mindset — “I had no choice, the system made me do it, those people made me do it, the booze made me do it” — has become the default for too many Americans. It strips people of agency and moral responsibility. It says, “I don’t make choices. Things just happen to me.” That’s a recipe for failure.

We need to bring back the idea that character matters. If someone can control his anger and walk away from a fight, that shows good character. If he can’t, we don’t help him by letting him blame booze, “the system,” or “the man.”

At some point, everyone needs to learn that choices have consequences.

We’ve gone from laughing at “blame it on the alcohol” to taking it seriously as social theory. That’s not progress. It’s regression — into a world where no one is accountable for anything. In this world, you can declare yourself a victim and opt out of morality.

RELATED: The awful irony of the White House’s crackdown on juvenile crime

Mikhail Rudenko via iStock/Getty Images

The incentive to claim oppression is huge. If you’re white, the easiest way is to identify as an “oppressed” sexual minority. This isn’t just about sex — it’s about securing a lifetime exemption from blame.

The Cincinnati case is ugly. And yet a defense attorney stood in court and suggested that drunken mob violence is better than racial politics. That’s how far we’ve drifted from personal responsibility.

If we want to cut crime and restore order, we must stop rewarding this thinking. We must revive the idea that personal responsibility isn’t outdated. We must stop letting people hide behind whatever excuse is in fashion — race, politics, poverty, wealth, or booze.

Thirty years ago, “I wasn’t asleep; I was drunk!” was a Homer Simpson joke. Today, it could be a legitimate legal defense in certain left-wing circles.

The sooner we remind people that they are moral agents — capable of making choices and accountable for them — the sooner we’ll see fewer “Cincinnati beatdowns” in the news. Until then, leftists, having injected race into every conversation, should take responsibility for what they created.

'Hugely successful': Trump triumphs at NATO summit, winning over allies after years of resistance



President Donald Trump's participation in this week's NATO summit was well-received and represented a significant victory for him, contrasting with similar meetings during his previous administration.

'This has been a hugely successful summit for President Trump.'

In 2018, when Trump was pushing NATO allies to meet their then-target of 2% of GDP for defense spending, he got into a spat with German officials after he scolded the country for cutting an oil and gas deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin. He accused Germany of being "totally controlled by Russia," calling it a "very bad thing for NATO."

The following year, several allies — then-Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson, and President of France Emmanuel Macron — were caught on camera mocking Trump.

In contrast, this year's NATO summit in the Netherlands was notably successful for Trump.

RELATED: Trump to take on NATO summit: Will allies step up or stall?

G7 summit on June 9, 2018, in Charlevoix, Canada. Photo by Jesco Denzel /Bundesregierung via Getty Images

Dr. Nile Gardiner, director of the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom and Bernard and Barbara Lomas fellow, told Blaze News, "This has been a hugely successful summit for President Trump and a demonstration of real U.S. leadership on the world stage — a dramatic difference to the weak-kneed Biden presidency."

At one point, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte even praised Trump for striking Iran's nuclear enrichment sites.

"I just want to recognize your decisive action in Iran. You are a man of strength, but you are also a man of peace. The fact that you are now also successful in getting this ceasefire done between Israel and Iran, I really want to commend you for it. And I think this is important for the whole world," Rutte told Trump on Wednesday.

Rutte also credited Trump for securing substantial defense-spending increases to 5% of GDP.

"Without President Trump, this would not have happened," he remarked.

RELATED: Canada's solution to reliance on US? Increasing commitments in Europe

U.S. President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

During a Wednesday afternoon press conference in the Netherlands, Trump reported that his NATO allies were "so respectful" toward him. He celebrated the increased defense-spending commitments from the ally countries.

"I left here saying that these people really love their countries. It's not a rip-off, and we're here to help them protect their countries," Trump said.

The only conflict Trump expressed was with Spain, the only country that refused to commit to the defense-spending targets. He vowed to negotiate "directly with Spain" on a trade deal, adding that it would have to "pay twice as much" to make up the "unfair" difference in defense spending.

Trump also confirmed that he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who he stated "couldn't have been nicer" to him.

Trump mentioned that he and Zelenskyy had previously experienced some "rough times," likely referring to the tense exchange he and Vice President JD Vance had with the Ukrainian president earlier this year at the White House.

Trump remarked that he had a "good meeting with Zelenskyy" at this week's NATO summit, adding that Zelenskyy and Putin would like to see an end to the ongoing war.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump to take on NATO summit: Will allies step up or stall?



President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend the NATO summit in the Hague, Netherlands, held on June 24 and 25, where world leaders are anticipated to cover a wide range of pressing topics.

The annual meeting provides Trump with an opportunity to promote American interests over globalist ideals while reducing the United States' defense burdens, potentially reshaping the alliance.

'President Trump will be calling on NATO allies to step up to the plate and invest in the defense of Europe.'

This will be the first NATO summit hosted in the Netherlands since the alliance's founding in 1949. Approximately 9,000 attendees are expected, including 6,000 officials representing various countries.

Defense spending

A top concern for the Trump administration is ensuring that American taxpayers do not carry an unfair defense burden compared to their NATO counterparts.

Trump has maintained a firm stance with NATO allies, pressuring the countries to substantially increase defense spending from 2% of their GDP to 5% as part of the president's efforts to push for burden-sharing among the nations.

Nile Gardiner, the director of the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom and Bernard and Barbara Lomas Fellow, told Blaze News that defense spending is expected to "dominate" most of the summit.

"This is the top priority for the U.S. administration. President Trump will be calling on NATO allies to step up to the plate and invest in the defense of Europe. I think you'll be looking for all of the alliance members to pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense," Gardiner stated.

NATO's 32 allies previously agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

With ongoing concerns of escalation from Russia, NATO's latest plan aims for 5% of GDP for defense budgets, including 3.5% for military spending and 1.5% for security-related infrastructure.

RELATED: Trump touches down in Canada for G7 summit. Here's what's on the menu.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Photo by SIMON WOHLFAHRT/AFP via Getty Images

Last month, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said he expects the ally countries to agree to the new goal during the upcoming annual summit.

"Let's say that this 5% — but I will not say what is the individual breakup, but it will be considerably north of 3% when it comes to the hard spend, and it will be also a target on defense-related spending," Rutte remarked.

‘The reality right now is Europe is not in a position to defend itself.’

The Financial Times reported in late May that Spain was the last major holdout on NATO's plan to increase defense spending.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated last month that when he met with José Manuel Albares, Spain's foreign minister, he "urged Spain to join Allies in committing 5% of GDP to defense."

Albares responded, "There was an exchange [with Rubio], and both of us expressed our views very clearly. I insisted that it was a huge effort to reach 2% and that the debate right now needs to focus on capabilities."

Spain currently commits only 1.28% of its GDP to defense spending. In April, Pedro Sánchez, Spain's prime minister, announced a plan to meet NATO's existing 2% requirement for the first time in 2025.

A White House official confirmed to Blaze News that Trump "intends to secure a historic 5% defense spending pledge from NATO allies that will advance stability in Europe and around the world."

NATO members reached an agreement on Sunday to increase their defense spending target to 5% of GDP. Yet Spain opted out.

Sánchez declared, “We fully respect the legitimate desire of other countries to increase their defense investment, but we are not going to do so.”

On Monday morning, Rutte held a press conference before the summit, confirming that NATO members had agreed to the new defense spending goals.

Peace through strength

The Trump administration has prioritized facilitating peace talks between Ukraine and Russia to end the war and reduce the United States' aid commitments. Meanwhile, tensions between Israel and Iran also remain ongoing. The U.S. launched airstrikes against three of Iran's nuclear enrichment sites over the weekend.

Resolving these conflicts is certain to be another key topic at the upcoming summit. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker previously stated that the Trump administration will begin talks with allies later this year about withdrawing American troops from Europe.

While Whitaker previously stated that "nothing has been determined," he noted that the administration would converse with NATO allies after the summit.

"It's more than 30 years of U.S. desire [to reduce troops in Europe], President Trump just said enough, this is going to happen and it's going to happen now. This is going to be orderly, but we are not going to have any more patience for foot-dragging in this situation. ... We just need to work through the practical consequences," Whitaker remarked.

RELATED: Lindsey Graham champions sending troops to Iran despite Americans' weariness of endless war

US ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker. Photographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Earlier this month, Sergei Ryabkov, Russia's deputy foreign minister, stated that Russia would not end the war with Ukraine until NATO withdraws its military forces from Eastern Europe, citing it as a central cause of the war.

Ryabkov stated that America must take actionable steps to address "the root causes" behind Russia's security disputes.

"Among these causes, NATO expansion is in the foreground. Without resolving this fundamental and most acute problem for us, it is simply impossible to resolve the current conflict in the Euro-Atlantic region," he said. "Given the nature and genesis of the Ukrainian crisis, provoked by the previous U.S. authorities and the West as a whole, this conflict naturally acts, well, if you like, as a test, a trial, which checks the seriousness of Washington's intentions to straighten out our relations."

Trump stated that he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on June 14, mainly about the Iran conflict. He noted, "Much less time was spent talking about Russia/Ukraine," but he indicated that there will be future discussions regarding that war.

"He is doing the planned prisoner swaps — large numbers of prisoners are being exchanged, immediately, from both sides. The call lasted approximately 1 hour. He feels, as do I, this war in Israel-Iran should end, to which I explained, his war should also end," Trump wrote in a post on social media.

‘Trump will be urging strong support from NATO members for Israel unity, calling for an end to Iran's nuclear program.’

Trump attended the Group of Seven summit in Canada, which was held from June 15 through 17, but left before the event's final day when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Rutte joined a breakfast discussion about the ongoing conflict. Several Cabinet members, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, remained at the event to represent the U.S.

Zelenskyy, who will also be attending the NATO summit, has been pushing for allies to implement stricter sanctions against Russia.

Gardiner stated that he anticipated the Trump administration would press European allies to increase military production to ensure that they have the industrial capacity necessary to "produce large amounts of tanks, weapons, aircraft, [and] ammunition to use for the defense of Europe against Russia."

"The reality right now is Europe is not in a position to defend itself," Gardiner continued. "I think, also, President Trump will be urging European NATO allies to stop buying Russian energy."

He noted that European NATO members purchased roughly €7 billion worth of liquefied natural gas from Moscow.

"They are directly helping to fund the Russian war machine," Gardiner said. "In fact, European NATO allies spend more money buying Russian gas than they do in terms of military assistance in Ukraine."

RELATED: A treacherous week for America First (and Israel, too)

NATO 75th anniversary celebratory event on July 9, 2024, in Washington, D.C. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Gardiner added that recent conflict in the Middle East would also likely be front and center during the summit.

"Trump will be urging strong support from NATO members for Israel unity," Gardiner stated.

Trump has repeatedly stated that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons.

"For 40 years, they've been saying 'death to America,' 'death to Israel,' 'death' to anybody else that they didn't like," Trump told reporters on Wednesday. "If you go back 15 years, I was saying, 'We cannot let Iran get a nuclear weapon.'"

After bombing Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities, Trump warned that Iran would face further strikes if its leaders fail to reach a peace agreement with Israel.

During the Monday press conference, Rutte addressed the United States' recent strikes against Iran.

"When it comes to NATO's stance on Iran's nuclear program, allies have long agreed that Iran must not develop a nuclear weapon. Allies have repeatedly urged Iran to meet its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty," Rutte stated.

A reporter asked Rutte whether he has concerns that the U.S. strike on Iran would result in the Trump administration deprioritizing NATO.

"I don't think so," he replied. "The news about Iran is, at this moment, grabbing all the headlines, and it is, of course, important news, but this summit is really about making sure that the whole of NATO, 1 billion people, will be safe, not only today but also three, five, seven years from now."

"Let's not forget, Iran is heavily involved in the fight of Russia against Ukraine," Rutte continued. "No doubt it will emerge in the discussions."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Judge accused of helping illegal alien evade ICE says she didn't think 'avoid ICE' meant anything illegal



Massachusetts District Judge Shelley Joseph denied wanting to help an illegal alien evade federal detention by helping him exit a courtroom through a back door.

In 2018, Joseph was presiding over a drug possession hearing for Jose Medina-Perez, a man from the Dominican Republic who had already been deported from the U.S. in 2003 and 2007.

During the hearing, the judge asked for the official recording of the proceeding to be turned off while she had a discussion with the defense attorney, allegedly to talk about how to help the illegal immigrant evade ICE agents. This week, the defense attorney testified as to what was said during the unrecorded period.

'It sends a dangerous message that political activism is more important than the rule of law.'

Attorney David Jellinek testified on Monday that during a 52-second off-the-record sidebar conversation, he told Judge Joseph he wanted to get his client, the illegal alien, out of the courthouse without interacting with ICE, the Boston Herald reported.

The attorney said he was aware of a back door used by court officers for criminal defendants and told the judge he would use it with her permission. Jellinek said, according to the Boston Herald, that he knew he was "on the edge" of ethical and legal standards, but said he did not break the law.

In a report from CBS Boston, the transcript of the hearing revealed that Jellinek had another reason for wanting to help his client evade ICE.

RELATED: Judge back under fire for allegedly helping twice-deported illegal alien accused of drug crimes evade ICE

Jellinek reportedly stated that he thought ICE was looking for the wrong man and wanted time to investigate and prove that fact.

When Judge Joseph was asked if she thought her discussion with Jellinek meant he wanted to "go out the back door," Joseph replied, "Oh, God no."

Joseph was also asked in the CBS Boston report whether she knew the words "avoid ICE" meant to avoid federal authorities in "any improper way," to which she replied no.

Joseph also said she would "absolutely not" have been a party to anything illegal like that, either.

According to the Boston Herald, Joseph could face devastating punishments.

Special counsel Judith Fabricant from the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct has recommended Judge Joseph be indefinitely suspended and stripped of her $207,855 salary for an alleged failure to uphold the standards of a judge.

The commission cannot remove a judge, but Fabricant suggested that a referral to lawmakers for Joseph's removal should be made.

RELATED: NYC comptroller locks arms with man to prevent ICE arrest: 'Show me your warrant!'

Newton District Court Judge Shelley Joseph (C) cries after leaving federal court in Boston on April 25, 2019. Photo by Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance told Blaze News that Judge Joseph's actions represent a troubling breakdown of public trust in the judicial system.

"When a sitting judge allegedly aids a twice-deported criminal in evading federal law enforcement, then attempts to cover it up by disabling a courtroom recorder, it sends a dangerous message that political activism is more important than the rule of law," Craney said.

Craney added that accountability on the bench "must be restored" and that the hearing was "long overdue."

The case will likely not be settled until at least early August, however, as a hearing officer said the parties involved have until July 3 to file briefs and then until July 10 to respond to them.

A written report and recommendation for the CJC comes 30 days after that, which would be around August 10.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

America Needs Stronger Missile Defenses Against Expanding Enemy Arsenals

Our enemies fear the strategic edge Golden Dome would give us and are desperate to stop it before it starts.

If Senators Showed Up To Work, They Could Easily Confirm Fighter Pilot Matthew Lohmeier

Senators maintain their comfortable, two-and-a-half-day work week while critical defense positions remain unfilled.

Cheapskate Canada 'threatens' NORAD? Trump dangles 51st-state solution



Canada could soon be booted from NORAD, the binational aerospace defense system it has shared with the U.S. since 1958.

The reason? Once again backing away from its commitment to replace its decrepit F-18s with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the jet that is used by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and Marines.

Canada has a long history of ... putting off the acquisition of military aircraft until they are nearing obsolescence when finally delivered.

Canada needs to buy the F-35 to be compatible with the U.S., as well as with the other principal allies that Canada also flies with: the U.K. and Australia.

East Alaska?

But President Donald Trump hinted at a way his penny-pinching neighbors to the north could get around the costly upgrade: Join the U.S. as its 51st state.

Who needs NORAD when you can enjoy the benefits of Trump's ambitious Golden Dome missile defense shield — free of charge?

“I told Canada, which very much wants to be part of our fabulous Golden Dome System, that it will cost $61 Billion Dollars if they remain a separate, but unequal, Nation, but will cost ZERO DOLLARS if they become our cherished 51st State,” Trump posted on Truth Social Tuesday.

“They are considering the offer!” the president couldn't resist adding.

Straight man

Canada was quick to play the straight man to Trump's trolling.

A spokesperson for Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney said: “The prime minister has been clear at every opportunity, including in his conversations with president Trump, that Canada is an independent, sovereign nation, and it will remain one,” according to the Financial Times.

Carney ordered a review of the F-35 purchase in March, insisting that Canada could be better served with fighter jets produced by Sweden, France, or the U.K. Although Britain remains a primary military partner, Canada does virtually no military training or operations with Sweden or France.

That suggestion has prompted U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra to note that any cancellation of the F-35 contract would have serious consequences for Canada — including threatening NORAD, over which the two countries have maintained joint command of operations for almost 60 years.

Plane speaking

“I think that's worked pretty well for the U.S., and it's worked well for Canada. It's, I think, one of the only, if not the only, bilateral military relationship in the world. So I think it would, but, I mean, there's criteria, OK, and some of those criteria are being questioned right now,” Hoekstra told CTV News.

Hoekstra continued:

One of the criteria for NORAD is interchangeability and interoperability. So that would mean that, you know, we're flying the same kinds of planes, we're using the parts, and, you know, it's all interchangeable. It's one system. You know, Canada is challenging that; they've made a decision to buy F-35s; that's now up for review. If Canadians are flying one airplane, we're flying another airplane, it's no longer interchangeable. And so that might even threaten NORAD, without talking about new alliances that promise even more security and safety to our people.

It’s not clear whether Hoekstra’s comments were designed for Trump to open the door on Golden Dome negotiations, but he has nonetheless exposed one of the more absurd and potentially tragic exercises in Canadian military procurement.

Jet set

Canada has a long history of either sabotaging its own aerospace industry — as with the cancellation of the famed Avro Arrow in 1958 — or by putting off the acquisition of military aircraft until they are nearing obsolescence when finally delivered.

The F-35 is another case in point. Canada has dithered so long on its decision to buy or not to buy that sixth-generation fighter jet technology is now on the horizon.

Incredibly, the government of Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien first signed on to the F-35 program in 2002. Even though that was almost 25 years ago, Canada has managed through successive governments never to see the delivery of one aircraft.

Chretien refused to make a decision on the F-35, as did his successor, Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who toyed with Canada’s air force for nine years over the deal. Meanwhile, the military continued to fly the F-18/A, as it had since 1982.

Today, those jets are over 45 years old.

Justin Trudeau campaigned in 2015 on a pledge never to buy the F-35, but after eight years of reviewing other aircraft, he flip-flopped on that promise in January 2023 and agreed to buy 88 of the jets at a cost of $85 million (USD) each.

Hoekstra's comments sent a clear message: fish or cut bait. Enough with using military spending as a political poker chip; upgrade to the F-35 or leave NORAD.

In response, Carney offered more dithering.

"The review of the F-35 contract is ongoing," he said at a news conference last week. "There's many factors that come into that interoperability that would relate to the NORAD element. There’s value for money, broader Canadian industrial impacts. All of those are factors that are under consideration."

EXCLUSIVE: FCC Commissioner Says Spectrum Auction Could Be ‘Win-Win’

'Is the juice worth the squeeze?'