I have another question.
In listening to your testimony, you talked a couple of times in terms of getting the right aircraft and the great cost of any plane, and in fact you better understand what your needs are before you sign the contract and expend that amount of money. You talked about your earlier process. You asked them about the number of planes they would be purchasing and how, if you get a plane that does not meet your priorities, then you're in part wasting some of that huge amount of money. You made that point a couple of times.
One of the things I've seen many times is how in fact it also works the other way around, where you end up using what you have. If you don't set out and clearly, for the public, have that kind of debate on the direction in which you want to go in terms of your foreign policy, you end up using the tools you have. You end up using the technology you have. In fact, it ends up being technology that drives policy, as opposed to policy driving technology, which really creates a huge, immense, ongoing problem.
Do you have a comment on that?