Chris has said most of it. I would say one thing. I think this number of 9:1 military spending to development is a red herring, because militaries cost a lot of money. It doesn't mean that you are necessarily disproportionate. Basically, to fly an Apache around and fire off weapons in support of our troops costs tens of thousands of dollars. That's the way it is.
So I'm a little bit wary of this comparison, that you spend a lot of money on the military and less on development. They're just different animals. To be frank, I don't think it's a relevant comparison.
The anti-terror mission that the U.S. is doing, the intelligence-led targeted operations against terrorist leadership--as Chris mentioned, it's not called OEF--has to be done. Someone has to do it, and the Afghan government fully supports it. They want this done, and so does the UN. So I think we can't shy away from the important work that the U.S. is doing. That is important,
That's all I'll say. Chris has said the rest.