Your thinking on this subject is flawed, I think. > We all know war is hell. We know using weapons to attack people creates horrific, real human harm. So sta

Your thinking on this subject is flawed, I think. > We all know war is hell. We know using weapons to attack people creates horrific, real human harm. So starting off listing the effects of weaponry on humans tells us nothing about drones. It just tells us about the horrors of war. Given this is an article about drones it should be very drone specific. This is a perfectly valid line of inquiry, in my opinion, because drones are often seen as being a "sterile" way to fight a war. No casualties on our side. To many, and especially the mainstream press, this basically means "no casualties worth caring about". So, reminding people every now and then that drones DO cause horrific destruction and death is a perfectly worthwhile undertaking. > Do drones increase or decrease the inevitable horrors of war? Your questions is almost absurd, it is not the right question to be asking. Of course drones reduce the overall horrors of war, because one side experiences no horrors at all! On the other hand, since one side experiences no horrors at all, it seems reasonable to think that these weapons will be over-used, used in situations where violence is not strictly necessary, thus actually increasing the amount of violence. Also, because the drones are essentially an enemy that can't be fought, the only rational counter is to strike at whatever American assets are available and vulnerable (terrorism).