how far in advance can you anticipate the need to defend yourself. That's point one. The second is can you defend yourself and use military force against non-state actors. When I began my discussions on these issues with -- largely with Europeans around the world, the general response coming back to me was you may not use military force to defend yourself against non-state actors. Non-state actors, you have to use the criminal law rules. Use of force is for conflicts between states. I think it's now becoming generally accepted as a broad principle that states may use force to defend themselves against a non-state actor that is housed in another state. And of course, the devil is in the details. We've not yet worked out what those details are, but we have a new international legal norm that's being developed. And then, of course, this last one's the one I think that David was referring to, is when can you use force essentially for humanitarian purposes, when the Charter would not otherwise allow it? TOOBIN: To stop a genocide, Darfur -- BELLINGER: Precisely. The strict international law rule would be if the Security Council has not authorized the use of force to go into Sudan or Burma or something like that, then you can't do it. And, of course, the United States has not, so far. But those rules are chafing a little bit. It makes it difficult for countries like the United States to stand idly by while