Amitai Etzioni sees the advantages of drones:
Indeed, if kill we must, drones have a major advantage over bombers, missiles and Special Forces: drones can linger for hours over their target before they take it out. This unique attribute allows the military to sort out whether it found the right target and whether the resulting collateral damage is tolerable. There is even time for lawyers to review troublesome cases.
Benjamin Friedman thinks he misses an essential point:
The trouble with Etzioni’s commentary is that it ignores critics of drone strikes that see the alterative as doing nothing, or at least doing something non-lethal. In that case, the question is whether the humanitarian toll and blowback is worth the benefit of the killing, not whether there is a better way to kill. I say we in the public lack the ability to make that judgment and should oppose the strikes until we have better information.
The Dish 