Which argument best justifies President Clinton’s use of military power in the Bosnian Conflict?(1 point) Responses President Clinton’s actions were justified through the inherent power given to him in as commander in chief of the armed forces. President Clinton’s actions were justified through the inherent power given to him in as commander in chief of the armed forces. President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was given the power to help NATO in Article II of the Constitution. President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was given the power to help NATO in Article II of the Constitution. President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was abiding by a congressional declaration of war. President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was abiding by a congressional declaration of war. President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was responding to a direct threat to national security.
President Clinton’s actions were justified because he was abiding by a congressional declaration of war.
The argument that best justifies President Clinton's use of military power in the Bosnian Conflict is that his actions were justified because he was responding to a direct threat to national security.
The argument that best justifies President Clinton's use of military power in the Bosnian Conflict is that his actions were justified through the inherent power given to him as commander in chief of the armed forces. The President's role as commander in chief is outlined in Article II of the Constitution, which grants the President the power to command and control the military. As the elected leader responsible for the defense of the nation, President Clinton had the authority to use military force to protect American interests and to maintain national security. Therefore, his actions in the Bosnian Conflict can be justified based on the constitutional powers vested in him as commander in chief.
