Which of the Following Is NOT an Argument That McMahan

Which of the following is NOT an argument that McMahan uses to show that jus in bello cannot be independent of jus ad bellum?

A) If the principles of jus in bello justify killing others in self-defense, they do not apply to unjust combatants. But whether a soldier is a just or unjust combatant depends on whether he or she is fighting in a just war, which depends on the principles of jus ad bellum. Therefore, whether the principles of jus in bello apply to a particular soldier depends on the principles of jus ad bellum.
B) It is possible for unjust combatants to perform certain actions that abide by the principles of jus in bello. But because of the nature of those actions and the principles of jus ad bellum, it is conceptually impossible for the unjust combatants' war effort to consist of nothing but those actions. Therefore, jus in bello is not independent of jus ad bellum.
C) The principles of jus in bello rest on the right to self-defense. This is because the principles distinguish between innocent and noninnocent people in terms of whether people pose a threat. Anyone who poses a threat may be killed; anyone who doesn't may not. Therefore, the principles of jus ad bellum are not independent of jus in bello.
D) The principles of jus in bello allow soldiers to harm others as long as the harm is proportionate to the good of the military objective to be achieved. But the goodness of any military objective depends on whether that objective furthers a just war effort or an unjust war effort. Therefore, the principles of jus in bello cannot be applied without knowing whether the soldiers are fighting a just or an unjust war.