Isn't "if there are regular drone strikes, it feels like the aggressor country is past that Rubicon." kind of self-refuting? Conventional forces aren't deploye

Isn't "if there are regular drone strikes, it feels like the aggressor country is past that Rubicon." kind of self-refuting? Conventional forces aren't deployed in many instances where regular drone strikes are used, thus the country didn't feel it was the right risk/cost to deploy conventional forces. At the very least, it's a statement that deserves more debate, and I'd point to the many examples of how reducing cost and risk tends to increase the rate of an activity.