Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

DOD

The (DoD, also DOD) is an executive department of the federal government responsible for providing the military forces needed to deter and protect . Headed by of , a cabinet-level serving as the principal defense policy advisor to the , the DoD coordinates the activities of the and associated agencies to formulate and execute defense policy. Established by the as the National Military Establishment and redesignated the Department of in 1949, it unified previously separate and Departments to streamline amid post-World II reorganization. The DoD oversees six branches of the armed forces—the , , , Marine Corps, , and (during wartime)—along with 11 unified combatant commands, defense agencies, and field activities, employing over 700,000 civilian personnel alone as part of its broader workforce supporting global operations. Headquartered at in , , the department manages the largest worldwide, with a fiscal year 2025 request of $849.8 billion to fund , operations, personnel, and amid persistent challenges in acquisition and strategic readiness. Defining its role are contributions to deterrence during the , technological innovations originating from defense-funded , and engagements in conflicts from to post-9/11 operations, though these have highlighted tensions between operational demands and fiscal constraints in sustaining force projection.

Department of Defense (United States)

History

The Department of Defense originated from separate civilian-led departments responsible for the nation's armed forces. The War Department was established on August 7, 1789, by the First Congress to administer the and initially oversee naval affairs under Secretary Henry Knox. The Navy Department was created separately on April 30, 1798, amid escalating threats from , granting it independent status to manage the growing naval forces under Secretary . These entities operated autonomously for over a century, reflecting concerns about centralized military power, though coordination challenges emerged during conflicts like the and . World War II exposed inefficiencies from inter-service rivalry and fragmented command, prompting wartime expedients such as the State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee in for policy alignment. Postwar analyses, including the 1945 Eberstadt Report, rejected a single department but advocated for bodies like the and to integrate military and foreign policy. Truman's 1945 message and subsequent congressional debates culminated in the , signed July 26 and effective September 18, which formed the National Military Establishment uniting the Departments of the Army, the Navy (encompassing the Marine Corps), and the newly independent Air Force under a Secretary of Defense, , sworn in September 17. This structure also established the with advisory roles and clarified service missions via the 1948 . The 1949 National Security Act Amendments, enacted August 10, redesignated the National Military Establishment as the Department of Defense, an executive department with full cabinet status, and augmented the Secretary's authority to direct budgets, reassign functions, and eliminate redundancies among services. These changes addressed early weaknesses, such as the Secretary's limited power over service secretaries, amid rising Cold War demands. The Pentagon, constructed from September 1941 to January 1943 as War Department headquarters, became the DoD's central facility post-1947. Subsequent reorganizations refined operational efficiency and unity of command. Reorganization Plan No. 6 of 1953 abolished overlapping boards like the Munitions Board and expanded the Secretary's staff with additional assistant secretaries. The Reorganization Act of 1958 further centralized over weapons systems, , and unified commands, reducing service autonomy in response to Sputnik-era threats and establishing entities like the Projects . The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Reorganization Act of 1986, prompted by fragmented operations in and , mandated joint service assignments, elevated commanders, and curtailed service secretaries' operational roles to prioritize integrated warfare. These reforms evolved the DoD into a more cohesive entity, adapting to nuclear deterrence, counterinsurgencies, and post-Cold War contingencies through 2025.

Organizational Structure

The (DoD) is led by the Secretary of Defense, a civilian appointed by the with confirmation, who serves as the principal assistant to the in all matters relating to the Department of Defense and exercises authority, direction, and control over it. The Secretary is supported by a Deputy Secretary and several Under Secretaries, including those for Policy, Acquisition and Sustainment, Comptroller/, and , and Personnel and Readiness, who oversee specific policy areas and operations within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The OSD also includes Assistant Secretaries handling functions such as legislative affairs, public affairs, and /. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), the principal military advisor to the President and Secretary of Defense, heads the Joint Chiefs, which comprises the Vice Chairman, Chief of Staff of the Army, Chief of Naval Operations, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Commandant of the Marine Corps, and Chief of Space Operations. The Joint Chiefs, supported by the Joint Staff, provide strategic direction but do not exercise command authority over combatant forces; operational command flows from the President through the Secretary to unified combatant commanders. DoD's military forces are organized into three military departments: the Department of the Army, Department of the Navy (encompassing the and Marine Corps), and Department of the Air Force (encompassing the and ). Each department is headed by a civilian Secretary (reporting to the Secretary of Defense) and a military service chief, responsible for organizing, training, and equipping forces for assignment to combatant commands. Operational forces are assigned to 11 unified combatant commands—six geographic (, Central, , , Northern, Southern) and five functional (, , Strategic, , )—each led by a four-star combatant commander who directs military operations in their . These commands integrate forces from multiple services for joint operations, distinct from the service-specific military departments. Supporting elements include approximately 17 defense agencies (e.g., , , ) and 10 field activities that provide common support services like logistics, intelligence, and health care across the department, reporting through various OSD principals rather than directly to combatant commands. This structure, established under the and refined by reforms like the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, emphasizes civilian control, joint operations, and centralized policy with decentralized execution.

Responsibilities

The (DoD) maintains and employs the Armed Forces to support and defend the Constitution, safeguard , and advance United States interests and policies abroad. Its core mission encompasses providing military forces capable of deterring aggression and prevailing in conflict when deterrence fails. Under the , as amended through Title 10 of the , the DoD coordinates and supervises all executive branch agencies and functions directly related to and the operation of the , , , Marine Corps, and . The Secretary of Defense holds statutory authority, direction, and control over the entire department, acting as the President's principal assistant on all defense matters and chief advisor on military policy, subject to presidential oversight. This includes formulating national defense strategy, which must be submitted to Congress every four years (or as directed), outlining required forces, threats, force structure, and necessary investments to execute assigned missions. The Secretary also prepares and justifies annual budget estimates for the department, directs expenditures, and submits detailed reports to the President and Congress on operations, accomplishments, and efficiencies achieved. Additional duties involve advising on senior appointments, delegating functions as needed while retaining ultimate accountability, and ensuring integration of military missions with broader national security objectives. Through the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the department develops policies, conducts , manages resources, performs fiscal and program evaluations, and provides oversight for defense agencies and field activities. The military departments—headed by the Secretaries of the , , and —handle recruiting, organizing, training, and equipping combat-ready forces, while ensuring logistical support and operational readiness for assignment to unified combatant commands. The Chairman of the advises the President and Secretary on military strategy, prepares joint logistic and mobility plans, and assesses risks to operations, without exercising command authority. Unified combatant commands, under combatant commanders, execute assigned military missions worldwide, exercising operational control over forces from multiple services to conduct joint operations, including deterrence, crisis response, and sustained combat. Defense agencies provide common support functions such as , , and acquisition, centralized to avoid duplication across services. Collectively, these responsibilities ensure the DoD's alignment with national objectives, emphasizing warfighting readiness, technological superiority, and efficient as delineated in departmental directives supporting the Armed Forces' core areas: , business operations, and enabling capabilities.

Budget and Procurement

The United States Department of Defense (DOD) budget constitutes the largest discretionary portion of the federal budget, with the fiscal year 2025 (FY2025) request totaling $849.8 billion for DOD military activities, part of a broader national defense cap of $895 billion. This funding supports personnel, operations and maintenance, procurement, research and development, military construction, and family housing, with procurement and research/development accounting for approximately 15-20% annually in recent years. Budget requests originate from the President and are submitted to Congress via the Office of Management and Budget, followed by congressional authorization and appropriation through committees like the House and Senate Armed Services and Appropriations Committees. Procurement within DOD follows the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and the (FAR), governing the acquisition lifecycle from requirements definition through sustainment and disposal. The process emphasizes competition, with exceptions for urgent needs or sole-source awards, and includes milestones such as solution analysis, maturation, and manufacturing development, production and deployment, and operations and support. Major procurement categories include aircraft (e.g., F-35 Joint Strike Fighter), ships (e.g., Virginia-class submarines), ground vehicles, missiles, and information systems, often awarded via fixed-price or cost-plus contracts to prime contractors like , , and . Multiyear procurement authorities allow commitments beyond one year for stable programs, reducing costs through , as authorized under 10 U.S.C. § 2306b. DOD procurement spending reached about $150 billion in FY2024, focused on modernizing capabilities amid great-power competition, but faces persistent challenges including cost overruns and vulnerabilities. Independent assessments highlight bureaucratic delays in contracting that hinder , with recommendations for streamlined processes to accelerate delivery of critical technologies. Financial accountability remains a critical issue, as DOD has failed its seventh consecutive financial statement audit for FY2024, unable to provide reasonable assurance over $3.8 in assets due to 28 weaknesses and 3 significant deficiencies in internal controls. The () projects continued failures through at least 2028 absent major reforms in systems and oversight, exposing risks of waste, fraud, and mismanagement in a exceeding $800 billion annually. Despite progress in auditing 32% of sub-audits successfully, systemic deficiencies in tracking transactions and assets undermine fiscal transparency and .

Military Technology and Operations

Research and Development

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) allocates substantial resources to , , , and (RDT&E) activities, which span , applied research, advanced technology , system demonstration, and , operational system , and operational testing. These efforts aim to generate scientific and technical knowledge essential for military capabilities, with funding structured across budget activities (BAs) from BA 1 () to BA 7 (operational systems ). In , DOD's total RDT&E appropriation reached $152.3 billion, representing over 70% of non-health-related federal R&D funding and emphasizing investments in to counter peer competitors. Central to DOD's R&D ecosystem is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), established in 1958 following the Soviet Sputnik launch to prevent technological surprise. DARPA operates as an independent agency with a flat structure, empowering program managers to pursue high-risk, high-reward projects that transition to military use, such as precursors to the internet (via ARPANET), GPS, and stealth technologies. Unlike service-specific labs, DARPA avoids incremental improvements, focusing instead on disruptive innovations through collaborations with industry, academia, and other government entities, while adhering to policies allowing open publication of fundamental research results. Complementary organizations include the service laboratories—such as the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), and Army Research Laboratory (ARL)—which conduct applied and mission-oriented R&D, as well as federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) that provide objective analysis and prototyping. The DOD Basic Research Office oversees foundational investments to build scientific capital for future applications. Guided by the 2023 National Defense Science and Technology Strategy, DOD prioritizes 11 critical technology areas to deliver affordable, resilient capabilities amid great-power competition: microelectronics, and , , hypersonics, , quantum science, directed energy, , integrated network systems-to-systems, and software, and human-machine interfaces. In , programs emphasize trustworthy autonomous systems for warfighters, including evidence-based assurance to enable operational deployment. Hypersonics R&D advances boost-glide and vehicles, with initiatives like the Army's Dark Eagle and Navy's aiming for precision strike capabilities exceeding Mach 5 speeds by the late 2020s. Quantum efforts target sensing, , and secure communications to achieve quantum advantage over classical systems, integrated with space-based architectures for resilient operations. For 2025, DOD requested increases in RDT&E to support these priorities, with proposed outlays exceeding prior years amid supplemental appropriations for urgent needs like uncrewed systems ($10.1 billion across 330+ programs). Challenges include financial flexibilities for reallocating funds during execution, as DOD receives about $95 billion annually but faces congressional constraints on , prompting recommendations for enhanced oversight to avoid inefficiencies. Outcomes from R&D have historically yielded dual-use technologies, though success depends on transitioning prototypes to acquisition programs, with achieving variable rates based on project risk profiles.

Key Weapons Systems and Capabilities

The U.S. Department of Defense oversees a vast inventory of weapons systems designed for deterrence, , and across multiple domains, with modernization efforts emphasizing , precision, and integration of emerging technologies like hypersonics. Key capabilities include the for strategic deterrence, carrier strike groups for global naval dominance, advanced and fleets for air superiority, and ground systems for , supported by missile defenses and precision-guided munitions. Nuclear Triad: The triad consists of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and strategic bombers, providing redundant second-strike capability with approximately 1,770 deployed strategic warheads as of 2025. Land-based forces include 400 Minuteman III ICBMs, each capable of carrying up to three warheads, with the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent ( underway to replace them by the 2030s for enhanced reliability against missile defenses. Sea-based elements feature 14 Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines armed with II D5 SLBMs, each submarine deploying up to 20 missiles with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), ensuring stealthy, survivable launch platforms. Air-delivered capabilities rely on 60 B-52H Stratofortress and 20 B-2 Spirit bombers, modifiable for nuclear gravity bombs or air-launched cruise missiles like the , with the B-21 Raider entering production to bolster penetration against advanced air defenses. Modernization costs for the triad are projected at $946 billion over the next decade, prioritizing resilience amid peer competitors' advances. Naval Systems: The U.S. operates 11 nuclear-powered aircraft , including 10 Nimitz-class and the lead Ford-class (), each supporting 75-90 aircraft for , , and in carrier groups that enable expeditionary operations worldwide. The submarine fleet totals 71 vessels, comprising 14 Ohio-class SSBNs for nuclear deterrence, 4 Virginia-class and 22 Los Angeles-class attack submarines for and intelligence, and 5 Seawolf-class for deep- missions, with Virginia-class production ramping to two per year for undersea superiority. Surface combatants include 70 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers equipped with missile defense systems and cruise missiles, alongside 22 Ticonderoga-class cruisers, forming a battle force of approximately 290 deployable ships optimized for blue-water . Air Force Platforms: The Air Force maintains over 1,600 fighter/attack aircraft, including 187 F-22 Raptors for air dominance, 450+ F-35A Lightning IIs for multirole stealth operations, and legacy F-15s and F-16s undergoing upgrades for beyond-visual-range engagements with radars and AIM-120D missiles. Bomber inventory features 76 B-52Hs for long-range conventional and nuclear strikes, 20 B-2s for penetrating defended airspace, and emerging B-21s projected at up to 145 units to sustain amid anti-access threats. Total active aircraft exceed 5,000, including tankers, transports, and remotely piloted systems like MQ-9 Reapers for persistent and precision strikes. Land and Missile Systems: The Army fields approximately 2,500 M1 Abrams main battle tanks, with the M1E3 variant entering testing in 2025 for improved survivability via active protection systems and reduced weight. Artillery includes over 1,000 M109 Paladin self-propelled howitzers upgraded for extended-range precision fires with Excalibur munitions. Missile defenses encompass Patriot PAC-3 systems (over 1,100 launchers) for tactical ballistic threats and THAAD batteries (7 operational) for exo-atmospheric intercepts, integrated via command-and-control networks. Hypersonic programs, such as the Army's Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (Dark Eagle) with boost-glide vehicles traveling at Mach 5+, achieved successful tests in 2024 and aim for operational deployment by late 2020s to counter time-sensitive targets.
CategoryMajor SystemsApproximate Inventory (2025)Key Capabilities
Nuclear ICBMsMinuteman III400 missilesMIRV warheads, 13,000 km range
SLBMsTrident II D5240-300 deployedStealth launch, high accuracy
BombersB-52H, B-276 + 20Global strike, nuclear/conventional
CarriersNimitz/Ford-class11Air wing projection, 100,000+ tons displacement
SubmarinesVirginia/Los Angeles-class26 attack subsTomahawk strikes, sonar dominance
FightersF-35A, F-22450+ + 187Stealth, sensor fusion
TanksM1 Abrams~2,500120mm gun, composite armor
Missile DefensePatriot/THAAD1,100+ launchers / 7 batteriesBallistic intercept, layered defense

Major Engagements

The (June 25, 1950–July 27, 1953) represented the Department of Defense's first large-scale combat operation following its unification of the armed services in 1947. Responding to North Korea's invasion of , U.S. forces under UN Command, led by General , conducted amphibious landings at Inchon on September 15, 1950, which reversed North Korean gains and advanced into until Chinese intervention in late 1950 stalled the offensive. The conflict involved approximately 1.8 million U.S. personnel, resulting in 36,516 American deaths (including 33,686 in battle) and over 92,000 wounded. Armistice negotiations concluded without a , leaving the Korean Peninsula divided at the 38th parallel. The (U.S. escalation 1965–1973) saw the DOD direct a sustained and conventional campaign against North Vietnamese forces and guerrillas, peaking with over 543,000 U.S. troops in 1969. Key operations included the (January–February 1968), which inflicted heavy losses on communist forces but eroded U.S. public support, and the incursion into in 1970 to disrupt supply lines. Total U.S. involvement encompassed 2.7 million service members, with 58,220 fatalities and 303,644 wounded; the war ended with the on January 27, 1973, followed by the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975. DOD strategies emphasized airpower, with over 7.6 million tons of bombs dropped, exceeding totals. In the Persian Gulf War (August 2, 1990–February 28, 1991), the DOD orchestrated Operations Desert Shield (defensive buildup) and Desert Storm to expel Iraqi forces from after Saddam Hussein's invasion on August 2, 1990. Coalition forces under U.S. command, involving 697,000 American troops, executed a 100-hour ground campaign following a 38-day air campaign that destroyed 42 Iraqi divisions. U.S. casualties totaled 294 deaths (147 in battle) and 849 wounded, with Iraqi losses estimated at 20,000–35,000 killed. The operation demonstrated advanced DOD capabilities in precision strikes and joint operations, leading to Iraq's withdrawal but leaving the regime intact. Post-9/11 engagements under the Global War on Terrorism framework included in (October 7, 2001–December 28, 2014), targeting and the after the , with initial rapid overthrow of the Taliban government via special operations and air support. U.S. forces peaked at 100,000 in 2011, suffering 2,402 deaths (1,930 in action) among 2.7 million served. Operation Iraqi Freedom (March 20, 2003–December 15, 2011) invaded to dismantle weapons of mass destruction programs and remove , involving 1.5 million U.S. personnel and resulting in 4,492 deaths (3,481 in battle). Subsequent operations like (2010–2011) and (2014–present) addressed insurgencies, including ISIS, with combined GWOT casualties exceeding 7,000 U.S. deaths. These conflicts highlighted DOD shifts toward and stabilization, with total GWOT service at over 2.7 million per theater.

Strategic Role and Impact

National Security Contributions

The Department of Defense (DOD) contributes to U.S. national security primarily through credible military deterrence, which has prevented direct aggression from major powers since the end of World War II. By maintaining superior conventional and nuclear forces, including the nuclear triad of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and strategic bombers, DOD ensures adversaries perceive the costs of attack as prohibitively high. This posture deterred Soviet expansion during the Cold War, contributing to the peaceful dissolution of the USSR in 1991 without direct U.S.-Soviet conflict, and continues to shape behavior of rivals like Russia and China, as evidenced by the absence of large-scale invasions of U.S. territory or core allies. In , DOD's operations have degraded global jihadist networks, preventing subsequent large-scale attacks on the U.S. . Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom dismantled al-Qaeda's core leadership, including the killing of in 2011, while campaigns against from 2014 onward reclaimed over 100,000 square kilometers of territory and eliminated key figures like in 2019. These efforts, supported by forces and precision strikes, reduced the operational capacity of terrorist groups to against the U.S., with no comparable 9/11-scale incidents occurring since 2001. DOD enhances through integrated defense capabilities, including systems that intercepted Houthi drones and missiles targeting U.S. assets since 2023 and cyber defenses via U.S. Cyber Command, established in 2010, which has disrupted adversary networks attempting intrusions into . The command's defensive operations have thwarted state-sponsored cyber campaigns, such as those attributed to and , preserving U.S. military and economic stability. Additionally, U.S. Strategic Command oversees global strike and space operations, ensuring domain awareness and rapid response to threats like hypersonic weapons development by peers. These contributions rest on empirical outcomes: the U.S. has avoided peer-state wars and major assaults for over eight decades, a record attributable to DOD's force projection and readiness, though sustained by high defense investments averaging 3-4% of GDP. Critics from institutions like the note opportunity costs, but deterrence's success is measured by threats unrealized rather than battles fought.

Global Influence and Alliances

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) exerts global influence through a extensive network of formal alliances, bilateral security treaties, and partnerships that enable power projection, deterrence, and collective defense. This framework, often described as a "hub-and-spoke" model, positions the United States as the central security provider, with commitments spanning Europe, the Indo-Pacific, and beyond. As of 2024, the DOD supports alliances involving over 50 countries, facilitating joint operations, intelligence sharing, and interoperability that amplify U.S. strategic reach. NATO remains the cornerstone of U.S. transatlantic influence, with the providing the alliance's primary military capabilities and leadership. Established by the in 1949, NATO now comprises 32 members, and the U.S. contributes approximately 15.8% of its annual common budget of 3.3 billion euros (about $3.59 billion), alongside substantial indirect support through troop deployments and equipment. In response to Russian aggression, the DOD has reinforced 's eastern flank since 2022, deploying additional rotational forces to multinational battle groups in countries like and the Baltics, enhancing deterrence against potential invasions. U.S. forces in , numbering around 100,000 as of 2024, underpin NATO's collective defense Article 5, which treats an attack on one member as an attack on all. In the Indo-Pacific, DOD influence manifests through bilateral mutual defense treaties dating to the Cold War era, designed to counter communist expansion and now adapted to address China's assertiveness. Key agreements include the 1951 U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, which stations about 54,000 U.S. troops in Japan; the 1953 U.S.-South Korea Mutual Defense Treaty, supporting 28,500 troops amid North Korean threats; and the 1951 ANZUS Pact with Australia and New Zealand, bolstered by the 2021 AUKUS partnership for advanced submarines and technology sharing. These pacts enable freedom of navigation operations, joint exercises like Talisman Sabre involving over 30,000 personnel biennially, and basing access, such as in the Philippines under the 1951 treaty. The DOD also pursues minilateral frameworks like the Quad (U.S., Japan, Australia, India) for maritime security, extending influence without formal treaty obligations. The DOD's global military presence reinforces these alliances via forward-deployed forces and infrastructure. The U.S. operates approximately 750 overseas sites across about 80 countries and territories, representing 70-85% of the world's foreign military bases and enabling rapid response capabilities. Major concentrations include 119 sites in for European operations, 120 in , and 73 in , facilitating training, logistics, and deterrence. Arms transfers and security assistance, totaling $80 billion in in fiscal year 2023, further bind partners by standardizing equipment and building capacity, as seen in aid coordinated through channels. This posture sustains U.S. deterrence but relies on host-nation agreements, which can fluctuate with domestic politics.

Economic and Technological Spillovers

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) generates economic spillovers through its , , and contracting activities, which in 2023 totaled $609.2 billion across contracts, , and in the 50 states and District of Columbia, representing approximately 2.2% of U.S. (GDP). This spending supports direct for over 2 million active-duty personnel, civilians, and contractors, alongside indirect in supply chains for , , and services. Economic modeling, such as input-output analyses, attributes hundreds of thousands of additional to DOD-related licensing and ; for instance, a 2022 using the IMPLAN model estimated 246,783 nationwide from DOD license agreements alone, encompassing direct, indirect, and induced effects. However, empirical estimates of fiscal multipliers for defense spending indicate limited short-term GDP expansion, often below unity due to crowding out of private investment and non- consumption. Studies on historical U.S. data, including wartime periods, find defense multipliers ranging from 0.5 to 1.0, meaning a $1 increase in DOD outlays raises GDP by less than $1 in the near term, as resources shift from higher-productivity sectors. Long-term economic spillovers arise more from diffusion than direct Keynesian stimulus, with DOD bolstering base resilience in sectors like and , though critics note potential inefficiencies from classified requirements that isolate defense firms from broader market competition. Technological spillovers from DOD (R&D)—which accounted for about 10% of 2023 contract obligations—have historically accelerated civilian advancements through dual-use technologies and knowledge transfer. The (DARPA), a DOD entity, originated the in the 1960s, which evolved into the modern via open-standard protocols like TCP/IP adopted in the 1980s, enabling widespread commercial networking and . Similarly, DOD-funded GPS technology, developed in the 1970s for military navigation, transitioned to civilian applications by the 1980s, powering industries from to smartphones and contributing to an estimated $1.4 trillion in annual U.S. economic benefits by 2020. Other examples include semiconductor advancements spurred by Cold War-era DOD contracts, which laid groundwork for integrated circuits used in , and materials research yielding high-strength composites now in and automotive sectors. Federal analyses document at least 22 major innovations with initial DOD or related federal R&D roots, such as voice recognition and lithium-ion batteries, though spillovers depend on deliberate and policies rather than automatic diffusion. Quantifying returns remains challenging, with econometric studies showing positive but varying gains in recipient industries, tempered by the military's emphasis on mission-specific durability over cost-efficiency.

Controversies and Debates

Criticisms of Size and Spending

The (DOD) budget for 2025 is approximately $850 billion in base discretionary funding, excluding supplemental war funding and other categories that push total national defense outlays toward $1 trillion annually. This represents about 3.4% of GDP and accounts for roughly 37% of worldwide military expenditures, surpassing the combined defense spending of the next nine largest military powers, including ($246 billion) and ($150 billion). Critics, including fiscal conservatives and libertarian analysts, argue that this magnitude enables systemic waste and diverts resources from domestic priorities, given the U.S. military's unchallenged conventional superiority and the absence of existential threats on the scale of the era. A primary centers on the DOD's persistent failure to pass comprehensive financial audits, with the seventh consecutive disclaimer of opinion issued in November 2024, as auditors could not verify over trillions in assets due to fragmented systems, incomplete , and weaknesses in 28 areas. (GAO) reports highlight ongoing fraud risks and financial deficiencies, projecting that full auditability remains elusive through at least 2028 without radical reforms. These failures, attributed by oversight committees to bureaucratic inertia and resistance to modernization, undermine congressional confidence and fuel demands for spending caps, as untracked funds obscure whether allocations align with strategic needs or perpetuate inefficiency. Specific instances of waste illustrate broader inefficiencies, such as a March 2025 Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) review uncovering $80 million in duplicative or low-value contracts, including redundant administrative programs. Historical examples include procurement overcharges like $1,500 coffee makers and $150,000 soap dispensers, as documented in inspector general probes, alongside cost overruns in major platforms that divert billions from readiness—such as the F-35 program's lifetime costs exceeding $1.7 trillion due to technical delays and supplier issues. Bipartisan critiques, echoed in congressional hearings, link these to the military-industrial complex's incentives for gold-plating requirements and lobbying, which inflate budgets without proportional capability gains, while boom-bust funding cycles exacerbate waste through rushed contracting and deferred maintenance.

Responses to Interventionism Claims

Proponents of U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) foreign engagements counter interventionism criticisms by emphasizing that selective military actions and forward presence safeguard vital interests, such as deterring major-power aggression and preventing threats from metastasizing into direct homeland risks. They argue that absent such posture, adversaries like and would exploit power vacuums, leading to escalated global instability; for instance, the 2020 National Defense Strategy explicitly links overseas deployments to deterring these actors and combating , framing non-intervention as a greater peril than measured involvement. Empirical analyses support this, showing that U.S. forces abroad correlate with reduced initiation of conflicts by potential aggressors, as larger deployments signal credible resolve and raise the costs of escalation for opponents. Critics alleging endless wars overlook data on the stabilizing effects of alliances and basing, which empirical models indicate boost in manufactured goods by fostering secure economic environments—yielding modest but positive net gains for the U.S. economy through enhanced partner capacity and reduced trade disruptions from . Studies further demonstrate that U.S. and assistance programs build partner defenses, deterring proxy threats and enabling burden-sharing, as evidenced by operational benefits like improved and intelligence sharing that avert unilateral U.S. commitments. In response to claims of overextension, defense strategists advocate prioritization frameworks, such as focusing resources on denying peer competitors like dominance in key theaters while avoiding peripheral quagmires, aligning interventions with clear, achievable objectives tied to core interests like homeland defense. Historical precedents underscore these arguments: post-World War II forward presence in Europe deterred Soviet expansion without direct U.S.-Soviet war, reducing insecurity and enabling alliance reinforcement that preserved peace for decades. While acknowledging setbacks in efforts like , defenders highlight successes in operations, such as the 1991 Gulf War's rapid expulsion of Iraqi forces from , which restored regional balance at limited long-term cost and prevented broader risks. Overall, these responses posit that DOD's global role, guided by rules like intervening only for vital stakes, empirically mitigates worse alternatives—such as unchecked authoritarian advances—rather than constituting reckless adventurism.

Internal Reforms and Efficiency

The Department of Defense (DOD) has faced persistent challenges in achieving financial accountability and , exemplified by its failure to obtain an unmodified opinion in seven consecutive fiscal years through 2024, making it the only major federal agency without a audit. These failures stem from inadequate documentation of assets, complex legacy systems, and decentralized financial processes across DOD's vast enterprise, which manages over $800 billion in annual . In response, DOD has allocated significant resources to remediation, including $991 million in fiscal year 2023 for technologies and process improvements aimed at a audit by 2028. Major reform efforts have targeted the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process, criticized for its rigidity and multi-year delays that hinder responsiveness to emerging threats. In January 2025, DOD issued an implementation plan for PPBE reform to enhance agility, flexibility, and alignment with national defense strategy, including streamlined and reduced administrative layers. Acquisition reforms have also advanced, with policies accelerating access to innovative technologies through agile contracting and reduced regulatory burdens, as outlined in 2025 federal acquisition updates emphasizing speed over traditional procurement timelines that often exceed a decade. Under the second Trump administration, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative has intensified scrutiny on DOD waste, targeting bureaucratic redundancies and inefficient spending projected to yield at least $60 billion in savings through optimization and elimination of non-essential programs. This includes directives for 8% budget reductions across services and agencies, alongside prohibitions on new IT consulting contracts unless justified by core mission needs, building on prior goals like $46 billion in cumulative savings from business operation improvements set during the first term. Despite these measures, GAO assessments highlight ongoing inefficiencies in agency functions, such as unrecorded reviews of financial assistance awards, underscoring the need for sustained internal guidance and oversight to translate reforms into verifiable outcomes. Historical patterns show that while initiatives like these generate short-term savings, systemic cultural resistance and entrenched interests often limit long-term efficiency gains.

Other Uses

Governmental and Organizational

The acronym DoD most commonly designates the , an executive branch department of the federal government responsible for coordinating and supervising all agencies and functions related to and the . Established on September 18, 1947, via the National Security Act, which reorganized post-World War II military structures by merging the Departments of War and the Navy, the DoD employs over 3 million personnel, including active-duty service members, civilians, and contractors, with a fiscal year 2025 budget request of $849.8 billion. Headed by the Secretary of Defense—a civilian position requiring Senate confirmation—the department oversees the , combatant commands, and defense agencies like the . In , DoD refers to the Department of Defence, the federal executive department tasked with defending the nation, advancing security interests, and managing the Australian Defence Force (). Formed in 1901 following , with significant restructuring under the Defence Act 1903, the department supports approximately 60,000 personnel and maintains a 2024-25 of AUD 52.6 billion, focusing on capabilities like . It operates under the Minister for Defence and includes groups such as Defence People and , emphasizing alliances like for advanced technologies. Fewer other governmental entities consistently use DoD as an acronym; for instance, while some nations employ similar defense ministries (e.g., Japan's Ministry of Defense), their abbreviations differ, such as in the . In organizational contexts beyond sovereign governments, DoD occasionally denotes internal structures like a "Department of Development" in nonprofits or corporations, but these lack standardized, verifiable prominence across reputable sources.

People and Places

D.O.D., the stage name of (born April 5, 1995), is a DJ and electronic music producer based in , known for and tracks such as "Set Me Free" (2014) and collaborations including "Paradise" with (2020), which charted on the . (Charlotte Edith Dod, 1871–1946) was an English athlete who achieved five ladies' singles titles between 1887 and 1899, starting at age 15, and won gold in ladies' amateur archery at the 1908 ; she also competed in , , and . Charles Dod (1793–1855) was a British journalist and compiler of reference works, most notably Dod's Parliamentary Companion (first published 1832), an annual guide to British parliamentarians that continues today as Dod's Parliament, providing biographical and electoral data. Thaddeus Dod (1740–1826) served as a Presbyterian minister in New Jersey, founding the Presbyterian Church in Washington, New Jersey, in 1767 and contributing to early American religious education through his writings and pastoral work. John Dod (1547–1645), known as "Decalogist Dod" for his exposition on the Ten Commandments, was an English Puritan clergyman who co-authored theological texts and endured imprisonment for nonconformity under I. Several villages in bear the name Dod, primarily in and states. Dod in Faridkot tehsil, , lies about 18 km northwest of Faridkot city, within an agricultural region focused on and production. Another Dod is situated in Dehgam tehsil, , , approximately 30 km from , serving as a with local farming communities. A third Dod exists in Firozpur tehsil, , roughly 25 km from city, near the border. These locales typically feature populations under 2,000, per census data, and lack major urban infrastructure.

Technology and Computing

In software engineering, particularly Agile and Scrum methodologies, DoD refers to the Definition of Done, a set of shared criteria that a development team uses to determine when a user story, task, or product increment is complete and releasable. This checklist typically includes requirements such as passing all unit and integration tests, code review approval, adherence to coding standards, documentation updates, and successful deployment to a staging environment, ensuring consistent quality and reducing technical debt. Unlike mere task completion, the DoD promotes transparency and accountability by aligning team and stakeholder expectations, often evolving iteratively based on project needs and retrospectives. Data-oriented design (DoD) is a programming paradigm that emphasizes structuring code around data layout, access patterns, and efficient processing to maximize hardware utilization, particularly CPU cache coherence and parallelism, in performance-sensitive applications like game engines and simulations. Originating as a response to limitations in object-oriented design for high-throughput scenarios, DoD prioritizes transforming streams of data over encapsulating behavior in objects, enabling techniques such as structure-of-arrays (SoA) layouts for better memory locality and reduced branch mispredictions. Proponents argue it yields measurable gains in scalability on modern multicore processors, though it requires developers to profile data flows explicitly rather than relying on abstract inheritance hierarchies. In printing and additive technologies, DoD denotes drop-on-demand, an method where or droplets are ejected from nozzles only upon explicit demand, contrasting with continuous-flow systems by minimizing waste and enabling precise, variable drop volumes. This approach, often implemented via (bubble-jet) or piezoelectric actuators, dominates consumer and industrial inkjet printers since the 1980s, with variants heating to vaporize and expel droplets while piezoelectric ones use deformation for ejection. Drop-on-demand systems support resolutions up to 1200 dpi and are integral to applications like and electronics fabrication, though they face challenges in handling high-viscosity fluids without nozzle clogging.

Entertainment and Media

The United States Department of Defense (DOD) maintains a formal collaboration with the entertainment industry, primarily through its Entertainment Media Unit, to facilitate accurate depictions of military operations in exchange for access to equipment, personnel, and locations at no cost to the government. This relationship, dating back nearly a century, involves script reviews and approvals to ensure alignment with DOD interests, such as portraying service members positively and avoiding sensitive operational details. By 2025, the DOD had supported over 2,500 films, television series, and other productions, often resulting in mutually beneficial outcomes like cost savings for filmmakers and enhanced public understanding of military roles. In cinema and television, DOD assistance has been pivotal in major blockbusters, including (1986), which received extensive cooperation including aircraft carriers and F-14 Tomcats, boosting recruitment by an estimated 400% in the following years. Other examples include (2008), where Air Force assets were provided after script revisions to emphasize heroism; (2001), utilizing actual military hardware and advisors for ; and Transformers (2007), which incorporated tanks and Humvees. These partnerships extend to non-combat films like (1995), supported by NASA-DOD coordination for authentic space mission portrayals. DOD involvement typically requires changes to narratives that could depict the military unfavorably, such as altering plotlines in (2002) to include positive Arab characters and reduce criticism of U.S. policy. Video games represent another facet of DOD engagement, with the development of (2002) as a recruitment tool that trained over 20 million users in basic by simulating real operations. The military has also partnered with commercial titles, providing technical advice and assets for series like , where DOD consultants ensure procedural accuracy in depictions of weapons and strategies. By 2022, all military branches operated teams, competing in games like and to engage tech-savvy youth for recruitment, with events reaching millions of viewers. Critics argue that these collaborations constitute a "military-entertainment complex," where taxpayer-funded assets subsidize by prioritizing favorable narratives over artistic independence, as evidenced by rejected scripts for films like (1996) due to unflattering portrayals of command failures. A 2025 study highlighted how DOD influence shapes at least one-third of military-themed films, potentially normalizing interventionism while suppressing dissenting views, though DOD maintains the goal is factual accuracy rather than . This dynamic has persisted despite post-Vietnam War tensions, with renewed cooperation in the 1980s amid priorities.

Miscellaneous Acronyms

In addition to its primary governmental usage, the acronym DOD has niche applications in various fields. In and methodologies, DOD stands for "Definition of Done," a shared agreement among team members outlining the criteria—such as , testing, and documentation—that must be met for a or increment to be considered complete and releasable. This concept, formalized in frameworks like , ensures consistent quality and transparency but is distinct from acceptance criteria, which are specific to individual items. In and vital records documentation, DOD denotes "Date of Death," the recorded of an individual's demise, often cross-referenced with birth records and obituaries for family history . Logistics and shipping occasionally employ DOD as "Dead on Delivery," describing goods arriving in irreparable or perished condition, akin to but differentiated from the medical term (). Less formally, DOD appears in casual or promotional contexts as "Drink of the Day," a featured beverage special in settings, or "Dear Old Dad," an endearing for one's . These usages are context-specific and infrequently standardized across industries.

References

  1. [1]
    U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) | USAGov
    The Department of Defense (DOD) provides the military forces needed to deter war, and to protect the security of the United States.
  2. [2]
    Department of Defense - U.S. Government Manual
    The Secretary of Defense is the principal defense policy adviser to the President and is responsible for the formulation of general defense policy and policy ...
  3. [3]
    Records of the office of the Secretary of Defense - National Archives
    History: Established in OSD by Reorganization Plan No. 6 of 1953, effective June 30, 1953. Textual Records: Reading file of Richard A. Buddeke, Special ...Missing: key facts
  4. [4]
    [PDF] GAO-23-105284, DOD CIVILIAN WORKFORCE
    Jun 21, 2023 · DOD employs over 700,000 federal civilians—over one-third of the total federal civilian workforce—and recognizes the importance of a diverse ...
  5. [5]
    Department of Defense Releases the President's Fiscal Year 2025 ...
    Mar 11, 2024 · On March 11, 2024, the Biden-Harris Administration submitted to Congress a proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 budget request of $849.8 billion for ...
  6. [6]
    FY 2023 Top DoD Management Challenges - DoDIG.mil.
    Nov 15, 2022 · This report provides Congress and the DoD's civilian and military leaders an independent assessment of the management and performance challenges ...
  7. [7]
    Historical Office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense
    The Historical Office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) dates to 1949. It is one of the longest serving continuously operating offices in the ...Pentagon History · Chief Historian · Secretaries of Defense... · EventsMissing: facts | Show results with:facts
  8. [8]
    Why the US Department of War Has Changed Names Through History
    Sep 11, 2025 · On August 7, 1789, during the very first session of Congress, President George Washington signed legislation creating the Department of War.
  9. [9]
    Birth of the U.S. Navy - Naval History and Heritage Command
    Jun 7, 2024 · On 5 June 1794, the reestablished Navy got its first officers, all naval veterans of the American Revolution: John Barry, Samuel Nicholson, ...
  10. [10]
    [PDF] THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Documents on Establishment ...
    In this volume are gathered the basic statutes, Executive orders, and related documents that constitute the official authentication of the creation and ...
  11. [11]
    National Security Act of 1947 - Office of the Historian
    The National Security Act of 1947 mandated a major reorganization of the foreign policy and military establishments of the US Government.
  12. [12]
    [PDF] g:\comp\intel\national security act of 1947.xml - GovInfo
    AN ACT To promote the national security by providing for a Secretary of Defense; for a National Military Establishment; for a Department of the Army, a Depart- ...
  13. [13]
    National Security Act Amendments of 1949, 10 August 1949
    Jul 26, 2022 · The National Security Act Amendments of 1949 (Public Law 81-216, 63 Statute 578) establishes the Department of Defense as an Executive Department.
  14. [14]
    Statement by the President Upon Signing the National Security Act ...
    I HAVE today signed H.R. 5632, the National Security Act Amendments of 1949. This legislation represents a major step toward more responsible and efficient ...
  15. [15]
    Pentagon History - OSD Historical Office
    The Pentagon is three in one: It is a building, an institution, and a symbol. It is an engineering marvel—a product of its time and civilization ...
  16. [16]
    DoD Reforms - OSD Historical Office
    DoD Reforms. National Security Act of 1947, 1949 Amendment to National Security Act of 1947, Goldwater–Nichols Act of 1986.
  17. [17]
    [PDF] The Department of Defense 1947 - 1997, Organization and Leaders,
    The act provided legislative sanction for the preparation and submission of a budget for the whole. U.S. military establishment. This proved to be the most.
  18. [18]
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Office of Secretary of Defense Organizational Structure - DoD
    Jan 17, 2025 · *** The ASD(SOL/C) is under the USD(P) but is in the administrative chain of command over CDRUSSOCOM and reports directly to the SD for those.
  20. [20]
    About | U.S. Department of War
    The Department of War has 11 combatant commands, each with a geographic or functional mission that provides command and control of military forces in peace and ...History of the Department of War · Secretary of War · Combatant Commands
  21. [21]
    [PDF] DoDD 5100.01, Functions of the Department of Defense and Its ...
    Dec 21, 2010 · Establishes the functions of the Department of Defense and its major Components, supporting the core mission areas of the Armed Forces, which ...
  22. [22]
    10 U.S. Code § 113 - Secretary of Defense - Law.Cornell.Edu
    The Secretary is the principal assistant to the President in all matters relating to the Department of Defense. Subject to the direction of the President and to ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] National Defense Budget Estimates for FY 2025
    Apr 9, 2024 · Overview National Defense Budget Estimates for. Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. The National Defense Budget Estimates, commonly referred to as.
  24. [24]
    What Are Key Milestones and Decisions Affecting U.S. Defense ...
    Feb 14, 2025 · Funding for national defense in FY 2025 is capped at $895 billion, the level requested by the Biden administration. Before taking office on ...<|separator|>
  25. [25]
    Part 217 - SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS - Acquisition.GOV
    “Direct acquisition” means the type of interagency contracting through which DoD orders a supply or service from a Governmentwide acquisition contract ...<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    An Overview of DoD Acquisition Process | SBIR
    The acquisition process encompasses the design, engineering, construction, testing, deployment, sustainment, and disposal of weapons or related items purchased ...
  27. [27]
    Multiyear Procurement (MYP) and Block Buy Contracting in Defense ...
    Sep 12, 2025 · Under annual contracting, DOD uses one or more contracts for each year's worth of procurement of a given kind of item. Under MYP, DOD instead ...
  28. [28]
    Guide to working with DoD - DoD Office of Small Business Programs
    Several government resources and tools can help you win your first DoD contract. This step-by-step guide explains how to get started.
  29. [29]
    Hearing Wrap Up: Government Procurement Process Must ...
    Jun 11, 2025 · Key Takeaways: Bureaucratic red tape hinders defense contractors' ability to efficiently collaborate with DOD, delaying the development and ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Part 1. Understanding the Results of the Audit of the FY 2024 DoD ...
    Feb 28, 2025 · The DoD OIG identified. 28 material weaknesses and. 3 significant deficiencies. 2024. The FY 2024 NDAA required the DoD to obtain an unmodified ...
  31. [31]
    Pentagon fails 7th audit in a row, but CFO says progress is being ...
    Nov 19, 2024 · Currently, the Pentagon's success rate is 32%. Failure to meet the 2028 deadline could have serious consequences, including intensified ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Pentagon Will Likely Fail Audits Through 2028 - GAO - Congress.gov
    May 7, 2025 · progress satisfied other than a "leadership commitment." Additionally, many of the thousands of identified deficiencies found in its 2018 audit ...
  33. [33]
    After DOD Fails its Seventh Financial Audit, Sessions Asks GAO to ...
    Dec 11, 2024 · ... failure to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse within the Department. In ... DOD's Fiscal Year 2024 audits,” continued Subcommittee Chairman Sessions.
  34. [34]
    Defense Primer: Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
    Nov 19, 2024 · The Department of Defense (DOD) relies on scientific and technical knowledge developed in large measure through research, development, test, and evaluation ( ...
  35. [35]
    Federal Research and Development (R&D) Funding: FY2025
    Dec 9, 2024 · President Biden's budget proposal for FY2025 includes approximately $201.9 billion for R&D, $7.4 billion (4%) above the FY2024 estimated level of $194.6 ...
  36. [36]
    About DARPA
    The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is an independent research and development agency within the U.S. Department of War (DoW). Created in ...Defense Sciences Office · Offices · Innovation Timeline · Strategic Technology Office
  37. [37]
    Research - DARPA
    Consistent with national policy and DOD Directives, DARPA fully supports scientific exchange. Our fundamental research awards are free from publication ...Programs · Program Managers · Disruptioneering
  38. [38]
    Department of Defense Research, Development, Test, and ...
    Sep 7, 2022 · This report provides an introduction to the structure of DOD's research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) budget for staff attempting to understand ...
  39. [39]
    DoD Basic Research Office
    Basic research leads to new knowledge. It provides scientific capital. It creates the fund from which the practical applications of knowledge must be drawn.
  40. [40]
    DoD Releases National Defense Science and Technology Strategy
    May 9, 2023 · Guided by the National Defense Strategy, the NDSTS articulates the science and technology priorities, goals, and investments of the Department ...
  41. [41]
    DARPA Aims to Develop AI, Autonomy Applications Warfighters Can ...
    Mar 27, 2024 · An important goal of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is developing artificial intelligence that is trustworthy for the Defense ...
  42. [42]
    Hypersonics, AI, drone swarms: Pentagon pours $179 billion into R&D
    Jul 16, 2025 · Programs like the Navy's Conventional Prompt Strike and the Army's Dark Eagle are aimed at fielding reliable, precision hypersonic strike ...Missing: quantum | Show results with:quantum
  43. [43]
    Quantum, AI And Space Anchor Pentagon's Deep Tech ...
    Jul 3, 2025 · The Pentagon's $179 billion FY2026 RDT&E budget signals a strategic shift toward integrating quantum technology, AI, and space systems.
  44. [44]
    FY 2025 DoD Budget Report - AUVSI
    The FY 2025 DoD budget requested $10.1 billion for uncrewed vehicle acquisition and development, with 330 RDT&E and 180+ procurement programs.
  45. [45]
    Federal Research and Development (R&D) Funding: FY2026
    Sep 3, 2025 · DOD: DOD R&D investments would increase by $21 billion (23%) to $112.9 billion—largely as a result of supplemental appropriations that the ...
  46. [46]
    DOD Benefited from Financial Flexibilities but Could Do More to ...
    Jun 29, 2023 · The Department of Defense receives about $95 billion annually to fund research and development. But the process to request and allocate these funds generally ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] FY2025_Weapons.pdf
    This book shows the major weapon systems funded in the FY 2025 President's Budget, organized by Mission Area Categories. Mission Area Categories include ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] GAO-25-107569, WEAPON SYSTEMS ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
    Jun 11, 2025 · GAO is recommending that DOD leadership take steps to ensure that future major weapon acquisition programs include leading practices for product ...
  49. [49]
    United States nuclear weapons, 2025 - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
    Jan 13, 2025 · The US nuclear weapons are thought to be stored at an estimated 24 geographical locations in 11 US states and five European countries ( ...
  50. [50]
    Defense Primer: Strategic Nuclear Forces | Congress.gov
    Aug 15, 2025 · In 2025, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that U.S. programs to operate and modernize nuclear forces would cost $946 billion over the ...
  51. [51]
    In defense of the US maintaining a balanced nuclear triad
    Sep 29, 2025 · The United States has long relied on a nuclear triad of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), strategic bombers, ...
  52. [52]
    2025 USAF & USSF Almanac: Equipment
    Total aircraft inventory; aircraft inventory trends; ICBM and satellite inventory; and aircraft age. Aircraft Total Active Inventory (TAI).
  53. [53]
  54. [54]
  55. [55]
    Navy Fleet Strength by Country (2025) - Global Firepower
    Ranking total number of warships and submarines by country, from highest to lowest. ; 1. China. CHN. 754 ; 2. United States. USA. 440 ; 3. Russia. RUS. 419.
  56. [56]
    United States Air Force (2025) Aircraft Inventory
    Dec 10, 2024 · Current Active Inventory: 5,004 Aircraft · Fighters (Making up approximately 32% of Total Strength) · Bombers (Making up approximately 3% of Total ...
  57. [57]
    U.S. Strategic Bombers | Congress.gov
    Sep 12, 2025 · In March 2025, Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) testified to Congress of the potential need for 145 B-21s. Some outside ...<|separator|>
  58. [58]
    U.S. Army's M1E3 Abrams tank to begin soldier testing in 2025 as ...
    Oct 16, 2025 · U.S. Army's M1E3 Abrams tank to begin soldier testing in 2025 as development timeline accelerates ... The vehicle will retain a 120 mm main gun, ...
  59. [59]
    Hypersonic Weapons: DOD Could Reduce Cost and Schedule ...
    Jul 29, 2024 · The Department of Defense is working to quickly develop hypersonic weapons, which are capable of moving at least 5 times the speed of sound ...
  60. [60]
    America's Wars - U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
    Jul 16, 2025 · An interactive fact sheet providing data related to service members from the Revolutionary War to the Globar War on Terrorism.
  61. [61]
    U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts | Congress.gov
    Feb 5, 2024 · This report lists the beginning and ending dates for "periods of war" found in Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, dealing with the Department of ...
  62. [62]
    Major Military Operations Since World War II - InfoPlease
    Jul 31, 2023 · Conflicts after World War II ; 1950-1953. Korean War ; 1961. Bay of Pigs ; 1961-1973. Vietnam War ; 1965. Dominican Republic ; 1982. Lebanon.
  63. [63]
    Overseas Contingency Operations (OEF, OIF, OND, OIR & OFS ...
    Operation ENDURING FREEDOM began on October 7, 2001, when the United States launched military operations in Afghanistan, including airstrikes against Kabul and ...Total Casualties · Marine Corps · Space Force · Army<|separator|>
  64. [64]
    What is deterrence, and what is its role in U.S. national defense?
    May 1, 2024 · The Department of Defense's priority mission has always been deterrence to keep other countries from waging war against the United States.
  65. [65]
    USSTRATCOM Chief: Deterrence Keeps Major-Power Conflicts Off ...
    US Strategic Command is a global warfighting command whose mission areas include nuclear, global strike, space, cyber, missile defense and electronic warfare ...
  66. [66]
    Deterrence Ensures Great Power Competition Doesn't Become War ...
    Dec 7, 2021 · Deterrence Ensures Great Power Competition Doesn't Become War, Milley Says > U.S. Department of War > Defense Department News | U.S. Department ...<|separator|>
  67. [67]
    The Future Role of the U.S. Armed Forces in Counterterrorism
    Sep 9, 2020 · For almost two decades since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the paramount mission of the U.S. security establishment has been counterterrorism— ...
  68. [68]
    [PDF] 2022 National Defense Strategy, Nuclear Posture Review ... - DoD
    Oct 27, 2022 · The United States and its. Allies and partners will increasingly face the challenge of deterring two major powers with modern and diverse ...
  69. [69]
    Command History - U.S. Cyber Command
    DoD depended upon digital information systems to command and control its forces, and recognized the need to protect and defend these vital systems. Recognition ...
  70. [70]
    Defense and National Security | Congressional Budget Office
    In the President's 2025 budget request, total military compensation is $600 billion, including veterans' benefits. That amount represents an increase of 162 ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] U.S. Security Cooperation in the Age of Strategic Competition
    Nov 12, 2024 · Acquisitions of United States defense articles and services by trusted allies and partners reinforce diplomatic relations and deepen military.
  72. [72]
    [PDF] U.S. Alliance and Partner Networks - RAND
    Apr 30, 2024 · This report can be of value as U.S. leaders approach the task of assess- ing and updating the U.S. national security and defense strategies. The.
  73. [73]
    US contributes 16% of NATO annual budget, not two-thirds | Reuters
    May 31, 2024 · The U.S. contributes 15.8% of NATO's annual budget of 3.3 billion euros ($3.59 billion). Washington also makes indirect contributions from its ...
  74. [74]
    FACT SHEET: U.S. Contributions to NATO Deterrence and Defense
    Jul 11, 2024 · President Biden ordered the United States to reinforce NATO's eastern flank, sending additional rotational forces to Europe alongside NATO's battle groups.
  75. [75]
    About NATO - U.S. Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
    NATO's fundamental goal is to safeguard the Allies' freedom and security by political and military means. NATO remains the principal security instrument of the ...
  76. [76]
    U.S. Collective Defense Arrangements
    A Treaty signed September 1, 1951, whereby each of the parties recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on any of the Parties would be dangerous to ...
  77. [77]
    Cultivating America's alliances and partners in the Indo-Pacific
    Sep 16, 2024 · The United States established a series of bilateral security alliances in Asia with the goal of deterring communist aggression and expansion in Asia.
  78. [78]
    Japan-U.S. Security Treaty - MOFA
    Treaty of mutual cooperation and security between Japan and the United States of America. Japan and the United States of America, Desiring to strengthen the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  79. [79]
  80. [80]
    Us Overseas Military Bases by Country 2025
    Countries with the Most US Military Bases ... Japan Flag ... Japan ... 120 ... Germany Flag ... Germany ... 119 ... South Korea Flag ... South Korea ... 73 ... Guam Flag ... Guam.
  81. [81]
    Officials Describe How Arms Sales Benefit the U.S., Partners
    "I can't say enough about how the training the United States provides our allies and partners can have a huge impact on a military or even a society," she said.
  82. [82]
    DOD Releases Report on Defense Spending by State in Fiscal Year ...
    Oct 15, 2024 · DoD contract obligations, payroll spending, and grant awards in the 50 states and the District of Columbia totaled $609.2 billion, which is 2.2 ...
  83. [83]
    Why Is the U.S. Defense Industrial Base So Isolated from the ... - CSIS
    Aug 20, 2024 · In 2024, the DOD and other national security agencies will spend more than $800 billion—more than 1 out of every 30 dollars in the U.S. economy.
  84. [84]
    [PDF] National Economic Impacts From Department of Defense License ...
    According to the national IMPLAN model, 246,783 jobs nationwide resulted from the direct, indirect, and induced effects of the DOD license agreements ...
  85. [85]
    Defense Spending and the Economy | Mercatus Center
    The existing studies found that a dollar increase in federal defense spending results in a less-than-a-dollar increase in GDP when the spending increase is ...
  86. [86]
    [PDF] Macroeconomic Effects from Government Purchases and Taxes
    Since the defense-spending multipliers are less than one, greater spending crowds out other components of GDP, mainly investment, but also non-defense.Missing: DOD | Show results with:DOD
  87. [87]
    The U.S. Defense Industrial Base: Background and Issues for ...
    Sep 23, 2024 · Production stalled and declined beginning in the early 2010s, as defense outlays decreased in response to developments like the Budget Control ...
  88. [88]
  89. [89]
    [PDF] Federally Supported Innovations: 22 Examples of Major Technology ...
    In fact, the origins of many foundational technologies can be traced to at least an initial investment of U.S. federal research and development (R&D) support ...
  90. [90]
    The Intellectual Spoils of War? Defense R&D, Productivity, and ...
    In the United States, for example, military R&D spending ramped up under President Reagan; fell back after the end of the Cold War and rose again after 9/11.Introduction · IV. The Effect of Government... · The Effect of R&D on ProductivityMissing: DOD | Show results with:DOD
  91. [91]
    [PDF] The Intellectual Spoils of War? Defense R&D, Productivity and ...
    For example, an increase in government-funded R&D in the US chemical industry induced by an increase in US defense spending in the chemical industry raises the ...
  92. [92]
    Unprecedented rise in global military expenditure as European and ...
    Apr 28, 2025 · Military spending by the USA rose by 5.7 per cent to reach $997 billion, which was 66 per cent of total NATO spending and 37 per cent of world ...
  93. [93]
    Ranked: Top 15 Countries by Military Budgets in 2025
    Jun 27, 2025 · The U.S. military budget in 2025 ($962 billion) remains the largest in the world—almost four times that of second-place China ($246 billion).
  94. [94]
    DOD Should Address All Statutory Elements for Unfunded Priorities
    Sep 4, 2025 · Our review found that 18 DOD components submitted a total of $134 billion in unfunded priorities above the President's budget request for fiscal ...<|separator|>
  95. [95]
    Initial DOGE Findings Reveal $80 Million in Wasteful Spending at ...
    Mar 4, 2025 · Initial DOGE Findings Reveal $80 Million in Wasteful Spending at DOD ... A quick review of some of the initial findings within the Defense ...Missing: 2024 | Show results with:2024
  96. [96]
    $$1500 Coffee Cups and $150000 Soap Dispensers
    Feb 11, 2025 · Most Americans support a strong, adequately-funded military, but concerns arise when the Air Force uses nearly $150,000 of that funding on soap ...Missing: inefficiency | Show results with:inefficiency
  97. [97]
    Wasteful Spending and Inefficiencies: Examining DoD Platform ...
    Jul 24, 2024 · The DoD should not consider the costs and challenges of maintaining a technically superior military as an excuse for wasting money on programs that are ...
  98. [98]
    Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces - RAND
    Feb 4, 2020 · This report provides empirical evidence on the deterrent effects of US overseas military forces. It investigates how these effects might vary by the type, size ...
  99. [99]
    American Deterrence Unpacked
    Escalation management is part and parcel of deterrence in terms of how to keep a crisis from turning into a conflict and how to keep a limited war from turning ...
  100. [100]
    Does the U.S. Economy Benefit from U.S. Alliances and Forward ...
    Sep 1, 2022 · The authors develop a new model that provides evidence that US alliances increase bilateral trade in manufactured goods and that this has a modest but positive ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  101. [101]
    [PDF] Does the U.S. Economy Benefit from U.S. Alliances and Forward ...
    Mar 1, 2022 · The strongest empirical evidence linking U.S. military engagement and economic benefits examines global alliances.1 Scholars have ...
  102. [102]
    “Train the World”: Examining the Logics of US Foreign Military Training
    Apr 17, 2024 · The Defense Department identifies five operational benefits of such programs: building defense relationships; developing partner military ...
  103. [103]
    The Role of Forward Presence in U.S. Military Strategy
    The United States has maintained a global forward presence, particularly in East Asia, in the Middle East, and in Europe with our NATO allies.<|separator|>
  104. [104]
    American Military Intervention: A User's Guide
    American policymakers follow clear guidelines in deciding where and when American military intervention is most needed and how it can be most effective.
  105. [105]
    THE PROBLEM WITH RULES FOR U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTION
    Jul 18, 2017 · Preble's first rule: “The United States should not send US troops into harm's way unless a vital US national security interest is at stake.”
  106. [106]
    Status of Remediation Efforts to Meet Audit Mandate | U.S. GAO
    Sep 16, 2025 · As of FY 2024, DOD was the only major federal agency that had never achieved a clean audit opinion—when auditors find that financial ...
  107. [107]
    Department of Defense Completes Seventh Consecutive ...
    Nov 15, 2024 · The Department is firmly committed and is taking actions to achieve an unmodified audit opinion on its financial statements by December 31, 2028 ...
  108. [108]
    Fixing the DOD's Audit Problem - CSIS
    Jan 23, 2025 · Fixing the DOD's Audit Problem · Relook at policies and standards that add no value to the DOD but add complexity to processes and systems.
  109. [109]
    DOD Official Briefs Lawmakers on Financial Management Progress ...
    Sep 25, 2024 · In fiscal year 2023, DOD invested $991 million in audit remediation including investments in key technologies to accelerate audit progress and ...
  110. [110]
    [PDF] DoD PPBE Reform Implementation Plan
    Jan 16, 2025 · The DoD PPBE reform aims to improve agility, flexibility, and responsiveness of the PPBE process to better support the National Defense ...
  111. [111]
    Acquisition Reform: Accelerating Government Access to Innovative ...
    May 2, 2025 · The federal government's acquisition landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation, emphasizing agility, innovation, and efficiency.
  112. [112]
    DOGE can save taxpayers $60+ billion by targeting DoD waste
    Jan 28, 2025 · The Trump administration can strengthen US national security and save taxpayer funds by cutting at least $60 billion in Pentagon waste and inefficiencies.
  113. [113]
    Trump Restructures the Pentagon Budget: Two Views - CSIS
    Apr 16, 2025 · In February, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth directed the military services and defense agencies to identify 8 percent, ...
  114. [114]
    [PDF] DoD Reform Savings | Performance.gov
    DoD aims for $16.4B in reform savings by 2021, with $46B total over FY 19-24, by improving business operations and reducing regulatory burden.Missing: US | Show results with:US
  115. [115]
    DOD Needs to Address Inefficiencies and Implement Reform across ...
    Sep 6, 2018 · GAO is making five recommendations, including for DOD to develop internal guidance to conduct and record its reviews of DAFAs; collect ...
  116. [116]
    [PDF] Promoting Efficiency in the Department of Defense: Keep Trying, But ...
    The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) commissioned this monograph on. DoD efficiency initiatives in order to accomplish three goals: first, ...
  117. [117]
    Ministry of defence - Wikipedia
    Ministry of Defence (Afghanistan) · Ministry of Defence (Albania) · Ministry of Defence (Algeria) · Ministry of National Defence and Homeland Veterans (Angola) ...List of current defence ministers · Minister of Defense · Dutch Ministry of Defense
  118. [118]
    D.O.D – Artists - Insomniac
    DOD has well and truly found the sweet spot between fun and fame after starting off his DJ career playing in local bars and clubs in his hometown of Bury in ...
  119. [119]
    D.O.D - D.O.D
    D.O.D. LINK. EVERY STEP. D.O.D. LINK. SET ME FREE. D.O.D. LINK. ALL MINE. D.O.D. LINK. PARADISE. D.O.D, Ina Wroldsen. LINK. STILL SLEEPLESS. D.O.D, Carla Monroe.
  120. [120]
    Dod - Surname Origins & Meanings - Last Names - MyHeritage
    The surname Dod has historical roots that can be traced back to medieval England, with its earliest appearances recorded in the 13th century.
  121. [121]
    Most Famous People with Last Name Dod - #1 is Charles Dod
    The most famous person with last name Dod is Charles Dod. Other famous people with last name include celebrities like Thaddeus Dod and John Dod.
  122. [122]
    Dod Village in Faridkot, Punjab | villageinfo.in
    Dod is a village located in Faridkot tehsil of Faridkot district in Punjab, India. It is situated 18km away from Faridkot, which is both district & sub-district ...
  123. [123]
    Dod Village, Dehgam – Map, Weather, Population
    Dod is a small yet distinct village nestled in the Dehgam tehsil of Gandhinagar district, within the Indian state of Gujarat. Dod is known for its charm, ...
  124. [124]
    Dod Village in Firozpur, Punjab | villageinfo.in
    Dod is a village located in Firozpur tehsil of Firozpur district in Punjab, India. It is situated 25km away from Firozpur, which is both district & sub-district ...
  125. [125]
    Map of Dod Village in Faridkot Tehsil, Faridkot of Punjab - India Map
    Dod Google map shows the location of Dod village under Faridkot, Faridkot of Punjab state using Google Maps data. List of Villages in Faridkot, Faridkot, Punjab.
  126. [126]
    What is the Definition of Done (DoD) in Agile? - Atlassian
    The DoD is a set of high-level criteria that defines when a product increment is complete. It ensures the quality and consistency of a deliverable. Teams ...Missing: science | Show results with:science
  127. [127]
    Definition of Done in Software Development - GeeksforGeeks
    Jul 23, 2025 · The definition of done is an agile concept that establishes a shared vision between the development team and the customer or product owner.
  128. [128]
    What Is the Definition of Done (DOD) in Agile? Plus Tips | Indeed.com
    Jul 26, 2025 · Software: The definition of done in software development might be having a working code that passes the automated build process. Hardware ...
  129. [129]
    Richard Fabian - Data-oriented design
    Data-Oriented Design · Parallel processing · Distributed computing · Runtime hardware configuration · Data centric development in hardware design.
  130. [130]
    Part 1: Understand data-oriented design - Unity Learn
    In this section of the DOTS Best Practices guide, you will: Learn how data-oriented design (DOD) differs from object-oriented programming.
  131. [131]
    Revolutionize Your Code: The Magic of Data-oriented Design (DOD ...
    Oct 3, 2023 · Data-oriented Design, or DOD, is a software engineering approach and mindset that focuses on data as the central point of any application.
  132. [132]
    Drop-on-Demand Inkjets - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    A drop-on-demand (DOD) inkjet printer only releases droplets when being triggered, either by thermal or piezoelectric effect.
  133. [133]
    Drop-on-demand printing technology (DOD) - REA JET
    The drop-on-demand (DOD) process is an innovative printing technology in which ink droplets are only dispensed when they are actually needed.
  134. [134]
    What is "Drop-on-Demand" Printing?
    With drop-on-demand inkjet printing, the printhead dispenses ink only when needed. Drop-on-demand technology, when combined with variable drop sizes, permits ...
  135. [135]
    How & Why DOD Works With Hollywood - Department of War
    The Defense Department has a long-standing relationship with Hollywood. In fact, it's been working with filmmakers for nearly 100 years with a goal that's ...
  136. [136]
    Hollywood, Military Cooperation Often Mutually Beneficial - DVIDS
    Apr 7, 2025 · Military involvement with a film project normally begins with script review. All projects must ultimately get DoD approval to move forward. “The ...
  137. [137]
    And the Oscar goes to ... the Pentagon! - Responsible Statecraft
    At least one-third of blockbuster films substantially featuring the military were likely produced with DoD support.
  138. [138]
    6 of the Best Movies Made with Help from the Department of Defense
    May 31, 2023 · 6 of the Best Movies Made with Help from the Department of Defense · Black Hawk Down · Top Gun · Red Dawn · Apollo 13 · GoldenEye · Iron Man · Keep Up ...
  139. [139]
    Deep Dive: The Pentagon Influence Behind the Silver Screen - Inkstick
    May 23, 2025 · A new study at Brown University's Costs of War project explores the Pentagon's role in war-themed Hollywood films.
  140. [140]
    5 Times the US Military Has Used Video Games for Training ... - IDGA
    Oct 21, 2024 · The most recognized use of video games by the US military is the game “America's Army” which was created by the Army in the early 21st century.
  141. [141]
    Call of Duty, Marvel and the Military-Entertainment Complex
    Nov 18, 2022 · The military-entertainment complex describes the relationship that the United States Department of Defense (DoD) has with many entertainment companies.<|separator|>
  142. [142]
    Military Esports: How Gaming Is Changing Recruitment & Morale
    Dec 13, 2022 · As the esports industry continues to grow exponentially, nearly every branch of the military now has an official service-sanctioned gaming ...
  143. [143]
    The Militarization of Entertainment: How Hollywood ... - Ray Williams
    Mar 24, 2025 · U.S. taxpayers effectively subsidize military propaganda disguised as commercial entertainment that targets them as consumers.
  144. [144]
    [PDF] The Militarization of Movies and Television Tanner Mirrlees1 ...
    Feb 25, 2025 · This is the best documentary movie about the DoD-Hollywood complex, noting 2,500 entertainment products shaped by the. DoD from the beginning of ...
  145. [145]
    Hollywood: the Pentagon's secret weapon - Index on Censorship
    Mar 6, 2025 · Roger Stahl speaks to Index about the Department of Defense's continuing influence on Hollywood movies.
  146. [146]
    What is a Definition of Done? - Scrum.org
    The Scrum Guide says the Definition of Done is a formal description of the state of the Increment when it meets the quality measures required for the product.
  147. [147]
    Definition of Done - Scrum Inc.
    The Definition of Done is the commitment contained within the Increment artifact. Think of the DoD as what the organization requires before it can deliver a PBI ...
  148. [148]
    DOD - Definition by AcronymFinder
    DOD, Diablone (gaming clan) ; DOD, Drag-on Dragoon (video game) ; DOD, Date Of Death (geneaological term) ; DoD, Definition of Done (software development).
  149. [149]
    DOD Dead On Delivery - All Acronyms
    The abbreviation DOD stands for Dead On Delivery. It is commonly used in various contexts. Whether you're looking for detailed explanations or just a quick ...