Thank you.
We were talking about this sense of how we.... If we send folks to do jobs, they need what I call adequate tools to go with them. We learned that lesson from the Balkans, as you pointed out. If we're preparing for worst-case scenarios, as we now believe we should, we don't want to send folks with tools that are inadequate. In a prior life I was an electrician at one point in time, and there was no sense in my showing up without a meter if I was about to find out that a line had 40,000 volts in it. It's not a good idea to wet your finger and hold it up, although some folks probably have done that.
We're sending folks with tools, but we need a balance between what we're prepared to go and do, based on our knowledge as we enter, and the realities on the ground. We need a balance between our expectations and the expectations of the folks who are actually going to go and help, for lack of a better term. We're being asked to do something, whether that's to keep peace or try to help create peace and bring, as you said earlier, some stability and security. In the case of Afghanistan we were hoping for development, but I didn't hear that in the last question.
If it's not an escalating spectrum of violence, what do we do if we prepare for the violence that isn't there with the tools that are appropriate? What do we do after that? Once we arrive and we're on the ground, and we don't actually need to have this level of equipment and tools, if you will, what would you see us doing then?