You don't need to kill dozens of bystanders to misuse drone technology or to do it unaccountably. As I understand it, the call for a drone kill of an insurgent

You don't need to kill dozens of bystanders to misuse drone technology or to do it unaccountably. As I understand it, the call for a drone kill of an insurgent target is made by the JSOC ...or... by a CIA officer in Langley. In the latter, the case for discriminate sufficiency is entirely up to the CIA and its current set of political priorities for that target, which is NOT shared with the drone team or their chain of command, nor with any non-CIA entity. I've seen no mention that the CIA is NO LONGER killing with drones (which became one of the established practices for drone use in Afghanistan about 5 years ago, IIRC). This program is very much one that Google would serve in targeting drones, which is why I mention it. No doubt the CIA would claim their reasoning behind each kill order was discriminate. But if my description of SOP is correct and the CIA is still in charge of many drone kills, that makes them unaccountable in any practical sense. For some background on CIA's targeting of drone strikes: "Transferring CIA Drone Strikes to the Pentagon" https://www.cfr.org/report/transferring-cia-drone-strikes-pentagon https://www.cfr.org/report/transferring-cia-drone-strikes-pe...