"The Fleet: Low Profile Today, Vital Tomorrow"
(See W. Holland, pp. 52-57, May 2006 Proceedings)
Vice Admiral James H. Doyle, Jr., U.S. Navy (Retired)-The author is right on target in urging a focus on the decade after next and reminding us that the Navy's overriding goal is maritime supremacy-sea control. The surface community should pay careful attention to the points raised. In 2025, the Aegis fleet of 22 cruisers and 48 destroyers, with 14 more building, will still be the cornerstone of our Fleet's surface combatants whether or not DD(X) survives. These warships were designed, engineered, and introduced into the Fleet with all the characteristics mentioned in the article-endurance, sustainability, magazine capacity, versatile weapon mix, speed, high-quality sensors, space, damage control, maintenance, plus growth and flexibility for forward and back-fits and new missions, such as ballistic missile defense from the sea.
Although about every fifth and sixth Aegis warship receives some sort of system upgrade to enhance capability, these cruisers and destroyers and their combat systems must be further upgraded selectively and in an evolutionary manner to keep pace with the ever increasing air and missile threat, particularly ballistic missiles, and to perform essential missions until replacement battle fleet capable surface warships can be acquired.
In addition, the ballistic-missile capability the Navy has stated is its core capability has been elevated to a national priority. The Navy has a responsibility to preserve and enhance this increasingly critical defense element of our strategic deterrent at sea. Thus, these upgrades must receive top priority in the Navy and not be pursued, as they are now, with leadership that is divided and dispersed in the technical community. Finally, in a budget crunch, available funds for shipbuilding should go to the core Navy requirements for hightechnology surface ships and submarines to control the sea, a capability essential both in peace and war and not performed by any other service.
"From Dusk to Dawn"
(See T. Scott, pp. 44-47, May 2006 Proceedings)
Rear Admiral Rowland G. Freeman, III, U.S. Navy (Retired)-MCPON Terry Scott's article made my day. Page 46 showed a picture of four command master chiefs who had just completed War College. There they stood, the backbone of the U.S. Navy, 5 to 6 service, or as I used to know them, "wound stripes" on their sleeves. They are the greatest proof of the real knowledge the Navy has. While our CNO sets the policy direction, these are the gentlemen who carry it out and make it work.
When I think back to my days as an ensign naval aviator on board USS Lexington, (CV-16), I remember who taught me my way around: Chief Jude Prather. Who kept me straight when I commanded my attack squadron, VA-144? My Leading Chief, George Everding. Both these gentlemen became officers. On shore, at NWC China Lake, my Command Leading Chief, Walter Hall was invaluable. At each step of my career was a Chief (1) to train me, (2) to counsel me, (3) to criticize where appropriate, and (4) most important, provide command support. I am glad to see the article by and about our enlisted force, the backbone of what we do.
Editor's Note
The Coast Guard flag list in the May 2006 issue of Proceedings contained a number of errors. A revised and corrected list can be found on pages 78-79 of this issue. Additionally, three of the photos on the Navy flag list were incorrect. The correct photos appear on page 79.
The photo accompanying the "Lest We Forget" column in the May issue featured an A-6 Intruder of VA-35, not VA-65 as stated in the caption.
Proceedings regrets the errors.
"The Bolivarian Revolution"
(See B. Candy, pp. 26-30, May 2006 Proceedings)
Lieutenant Colonel Jim Dorschner, U.S. Army (Retired)-Thanks to Colonel Gandy for a superb portrayal of Hugo Chavez and events in contemporary Venezuela. Based on my Latin America experience, including recent residence in Paraguay and previous tours in Guatemala and with the Southern Command J-2 in Panama, I suggest we not get too alarmed, yet, about the Bolivarian Revolution spreading farther afield. Clearly, we have to stay in tune with events and be prepared with practical options for any number of circumstances, including further successes by Chavez and other "revolutionary" leaders, but we must be careful about portraying these "revolutions" as synchronized threats to the United States.
In every case, Venezuela, Bolivia, and potentially Ecuador and Peru, the movements are focused on legitimate domestic social and economic class issues resulting from decades of neglect and corruption by ruling elites who, we must not forget, were often closely allied with the United States. While U.S. short-term memory may relegate our former actions to ancient history, to most Latin Americans our heavy-handed influence peddling was responsible for inhibiting the region's progress toward greater social, economic, and political equity, with the regional economic collapse of the late 1990s regularly cited as a recent example.
We must tread lightly, with an open mind, cognizant of our history in the region, while exercising a willingness to work with emerging leaders who may not look and sound like those to whom we are accustomed. Every time we publicly beat up on Venezuela or Chavez and impose a sanction we add to his stature. Finally, if I may correct Colonel Gandy on one point, Venezuela has yet to order MiG-29 fighters from Russia. There is lots of talk about new MiGs or Sukhois, or even Chinese fighters, but nothing firm yet.