Matt Osborne comments on my critical post on Drones:
What most commentators fail to understand is that the most important weapon on the drone is not a missile, but the camera. The drone can loiter longer than a jet. The operator can wait until the target gets back in his car and leaves the wedding. Believe it or not, that is exactly what operators attempt to do. The proof is in the ratio: two enemy killed to every one innocent. War is still a blunt instrument, be your weapons ever so precise; but that is the most precision firepower in the world, bar none.
Drones are far more effective than piloted aircraft costing three times as much. Get used to the future, friend.
I'm not arguing that Drones are more or less effective at keeping the civilian death ratio down - I'm arguing that they still vaporize people. Yes, they may be better at not killing civilians, but they still do kill civilians, and the fact that we use them in wars we should not be fighting doesn't negate the 'morality' of their greater efficiency. It's not a future I want to get used to I'm afraid.