I find that pieces like this one skewer the debate. The debate should be about war and the use of force, not drones. What's the alternative to drones? It's eith

I find that pieces like this one skewer the debate. The debate should be about war and the use of force, not drones. What's the alternative to drones? It's either boots on the ground, or not waging war. I think a lot of people, including myself, would prefer the latter. But if we're choosing between boots on the grounds, and drones, we should look at the facts. I don't have them at hand, but I have a strong suspicion that drones are the better option if you care for the people, both American and native. If you abolish the drones but continue the war, that's not a particularly desirable result. So let's focus on the negatives of war in general, not the negatives of a particularly effective technology that it can be waged with. I think the aspect of operators' mental health which the article brought up was very important, though. These people are soliders, but are they treated as such? Why are they not given more support? Why are they not selected more carefully and given better psychological training beforehand? It's a budget question, of course, but it still desperately needs to be addressed.