A friend of mine frequently says that he appreciates the fact that Obama got into office, assessed the situation, and made these decisions once having all the i

A friend of mine frequently says that he appreciates the fact that Obama got into office, assessed the situation, and made these decisions once having all the information the office has provided. I don't buy that entirely, as I think that the years spent in Iraq combined with our newfound ability to actually make drone strikes feasible meant that 2008-onward was always going to see a dramatic increase in drone usage rather than troops. I will admit to having said that, if this program was going to happen, I'd rather a cerebral Constitutional lawyer be the one calling the shots than anyone else, but that's certainly not a justification and I'm certainly less confident in saying so. It is worth noting that one year ago, the Post's Editorial Board[1] wrote that "Drone strikes are bad; no drone strikes would be worse" and that "What shouldn’t be up for review is whether drone attacks will continue to be a weapon in the U.S. counterterrorism arsenal... [T]here is little question that drones are the least costly means of eliminating militants whose first aim is to kill Americans." 1: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-continuing-value-of-drones/2015/05/01/5938eaac-ecf9-11e4-a55f-38924fca94f9_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-continuing-value...