Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
In some people's view, my question may be a little distasteful, but it builds on some of the other testimony you gave to previous questioners. It has to do not only with the readiness of the armed forces, but with the readiness of a population to support their armed forces and how the armed forces can maintain the support of a population.
We know that future conflicts will undoubtedly incur terrorist activities and civil unrest. We also know, in learning from our experience in Afghanistan, that the enemy tries to demoralize and show the population and the countries that are in there—and I'm referring in this specific case to NATO countries—how futile it is to be there, because they're going to kill more of our people and they're going to kill a bunch of theirs. As we saw those numbers of casualties going up, we of course saw at the same time the numbers of people who worried about the utility of being in a conflict that, on its face and in reality, was a just cause.
So realizing what the aim of the terrorist is, and realizing that they utilize against us the very things you look to as precious, such as freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and making sure that things are reported on, how do we prepare a military to talk to the public? I think it was done very well in the middle and near the end of Afghanistan, when generals got up and talked about the sacrifice being made.
Could both of you comment?