Do you have an idea about how these monies are going to be paid to this national army?

We're entering a period where DOD, and I think the people at this table understand it--other people in DOD have to realize that these budgets are going to get a lot tighter, these programs are going to have to be justified.

I have some real concerns about what has happened to the NATO Alliance, not with respect to Afghanistan, but I guess the only phrase you can really use is international sprawl.

I really mean that. You did mention other notable Americans who died of friendly-fire incidents on the battlefield.

We run the risk, as I mentioned to General Petraeus and General McChrystal, of allowing our success to be defined by something that's never happened before, something that we can't totally control, which is something that concerns me.

You have written in the past, that you believe that there should be a residual force in Iraq of approximately 60,000 American military, do you still believe that?

I think the key thing is to implement the SOFA, and to reduce our role and our numbers there.

I would hope that we could proceed forward in a very careful way, in terms of making any more mandatory obligations as to where our military would be used.

In our current strategic environment, these commitments can affect force structure in the short-term but really not play out to our national advantage in the long-term.

For every slot that is given to one person, it is arguably taken away from someone else.

But, also a national army is a component of a viable national government.

They really don't add, quite frankly, to the security of the United States to have them as members of NATO.