Suppose Someone Objected to Abbate's Argument as Follows

Suppose someone objected to Abbate's argument as follows. Abbate notes that commanders give explicit orders about how to respond to the presence of civilians during a combat operation. She argues that these orders specify which risks to assume to protect those civilians and that therefore soldiers ought not to assume any additional risks beyond those required by their commanders. But sometimes a situation will arise for which the commanders' orders do not specify what to do. In those cases, soldiers are permitted and perhaps obligated to assume extra risks to protect those civilians. Therefore, soldiers are sometimes permitted or even obligated to assume extra risks to avoid collateral casualties. Based on Abbate's arguments, how do you think she would respond to that objection?

A) By noting that other considerations, such as a soldier's obligation of loyalty to his or her fellow soldiers, entail that the soldier should not assume extra risks to avoid collateral casualties.
B) By conceding that in those special circumstances, soldiers are permitted to assume extra risks to avoid collateral casualties.
C) By conceding that in those special circumstances, soldiers are obligated to assume extra risks to avoid collateral casualties.
D) By arguing that in those situations, commanders have failed their soldiers by not anticipating all possible situations.