U.S. Navy Shows That What America Can Do, Brazil Can Do As Well

April 30th, 2008 by WILLIAM KERN

When one of Brazil’s leading columnists, William Waack, visited the Nimitz-class USS George Washington this week, what he came away with might surprise American readers.

Among some of the interesting observations Waack made were these:

“The George Washington has 85 combat aircraft, including the Super Hornet, the most powerful carrier-based aircraft. On a single aircraft carrier of this class (the Nimitz) there are more late-generation fighter aircraft flying than the total number available to the entire Brazilian Air Force. … American pilots and technicians probably fly more hours per week in conditions similar to the real thing (45 percent of flights, for example, are nocturnal) than their Brazilian and Argentine colleagues do in a year.”

And this - in telling of his realization that Brazil and its neighbors are incapable of defending their own waters:

“The message [of the visit by the US Navy] has been known for some time by Brazilian Navy officers: we have very few resources to protect the sea that we declare to be ours. And neither do we have anything to compare with a ’strike group’ like that of the USS George Washington (the cost of construction for which was almost twice the Gross Domestic Product of a country like Bolivia, for example).”

And Waack explains another interesting experience he had on board:

“The names painted on the fuselages of modern fighter aircraft, the name tags on the uniforms of technicians and sailors and a great portion of the officials on board are Latino. One hears much Spanish on board the George Washington, which is considered a model in terms of combat training and capability. Obviously, this capability is a function of the ‘workforce’ on board, and not the hardware or software of weapons systems.”

Waack concludes:

“My reading of this short visit by the USS George Washington has two angles. First: yes, these waters of the Atlantic must be ours not only by law, but in fact. Secondly: we can and we must be as good as they are.”

By William Waack

April 29, 2008

Translated By Brandi Miller

Brazil - O Globo - Original Article (Portuguese)

Few soldiers like to say that their activities are for political purposes - and the Americans that command the aircraft carrier George Washington are no exception. In a brief visit to the main vessel of the UNITAS maneuvers this Monday (Apr. 28), Admiral Phil Cullom, the commander of the George Washington Strike Group [see photo and video, right], only eluded to in the broadest possible way, the “political significance” of the presence of the George Washington in the South Atlantic.

Indeed, the arrival of the powerful warship for maneuvers - the heart of an attack force known as the Strike Group 8 - together with the Brazilian and Argentine navies, set an important political precedent. Amongst Brazilian Naval officers there was enormous discontent that three years ago, UNITAS (the official name of these maneuvers - Spanish for ‘Unity’) wasn’t carried out because of political interference that Brazilian officials attributed to [Venezuelan President] Hugo Chávez.

“Since the Brazilian government doesn’t provide us with the funds to reequip the Navy, why can’t they at least let us participate in these maneuvers with a fleet so much more advanced, so that we can learn things that aren’t in the manuals?,” asked a major Brazilian commander a few months ago, who preferred to remain nameless.

In that sense, the “message” given by the Americans is reasonably clear. The George Washington has 85 combat aircraft, including the Super Hornet, the most powerful carrier-based aircraft. On a single aircraft carrier of this class (the Nimitz) there are more late-generation fighter aircraft flying than the total number available to the entire Brazilian Air Force.

I would venture to guess that American pilots and technicians probably fly more hours per week in conditions similar to the real thing (45 percent of flights, for example, are nocturnal) than their Brazilian and Argentine colleagues do in a year. One of the Brazilian pilots that watched the spectacle of ultramodern planes taking off and landing every three minutes (almost the pace of an international civil airport) from the flight deck of the George Washington, commented with obvious admiration: “What they do isn’t that different from what we do - the difference is in the amount of times they do it.”

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of U.S. relations with Latin America.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 30th, 2008 at 6:24 pm and is filed under Newspapers, Pentagon, Military Affairs, Columnists, Latin America (Central/South), Foreign Affairs. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Stimulus? What stimulus? »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.