The nation’s early leaders believed in calling a spade a spade, so when they needed to name the agency of government charged with fighting the new nation’s battles they called it simply the War Department. The name survived from 1789 to 1947 when “defense” entered the picture with a cabinet-level “Secretary of Defense.” Two years later a full-fledged Department of Defense was created.

The switch from War Department to Defense Department was a public relations masterstroke. Who can be against the nation’s defense? Hardly anybody it seems when it comes to “defense spending,” which accounts for more than half of the federal budget.

Increasingly, though, defense is a misnomer for what the Defense Department actually does. By no stretch of the dictionary can the attack on Iraq be considered an act of military defense. For that matter, arguably the last time the nation fought in response to an actual attack on the U.S. was in World War II after the Japanese struck Pearl Harbor. The Vietnam War, the Korean War, the war against Grenada, the first Gulf war and the invasion of Panama were all wars of choice which had various degrees of justification that did not include acts of war against the U.S.

So why do we continue to kid ourselves with misleading talk about “defense spending” and a Department of “Defense”? The press can cure the former simply by retiring “defense” and calling all that money devoted to buying arms and fighting wars by its honest name, “military spending.” Unlike “defense,” a loaded word if ever there was one, “military” is strictly neutral, another very good reason to toss “defense” on the scrap heap of hidden persuaders we can do without because of the insidious tricks they play on the mind.

Renaming the Department of Defense requires an act of Congress, and you can almost hear the bombast. But there is a substitute rooted in precedent that is both reasonable and logical. The Cabinet-level position of Secretary of Defense was created in 1947 to oversee the newly-created National Military Establishment. That mouthful fell by the wayside when the Defense Department was formed in 1949. Congress need only return the department to its origin by renaming it the Military Department. The designation is broad enough to cover the many things the military does, from peacekeeping to war fighting, without sacrificing accuracy.

It’s surely preferable to Defense Department. If truth in labeling is a good idea in the marketplace, it’s an even better idea in government, which should not be hoodwinking its citizens with a Madison Avenue-style flimflam.