enacted in 1994. Second, Executive Order 13239 says nothing about Afghanistan being included in the “Southwest Asia theater of operations”; rather, it simply designates the commencement of combatant activities with Afghanistan and the airspace above. Equally significant, Congress chose not to identify the countries, regions, or geographical areas included in the “Southwest Asia” term, nor did it provide a definition of the term. Indeed, the fact that the parties, in them briefs and at oral argument, could not agree as to the countries that should be included as part of the “Southwest Asia” region and cited different authorities supporting their positions reveals that the plain meaning of this term is not clear from the statute itself. See Tallman v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 453, 461 (1995) (<HOLDING>), rev’d on other grounds, 105 F.3d 613 (Fed.
holding that ambiguity exists when a statute can be interpreted by reasonably wellinformed people in two or more ways holding that statements like sharp young people and that the employee was not a forward enough thinker could reasonably be interpreted as evidence of bias under the adea holding that a phrase should be interpreted consistent with the context of the statute in which it is contained holding that the commission reasonably interpreted the statute as requiring it to assess the condition of the industry as a whole holding that a general statute is superseded by a more recent specific statute only if the two statutes are in conflict