# Americans - how do you morally justify drone strikes in the "War on Terror"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 11, 2012, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440 "2012-10-11T18:05:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/161 "2012-10-12T18:18:33Z")
There seem to be three unrelated objections to “drone strikes”: [ul][li]1. Does the end justify the means? I.e., how many bad guys must we kill to justify the killing of an innocent?[/li][li] 2. What gives the U.S. a right to decide who is a bad guy? If the U.S. has the right to decide some al-Qaeda operative is “bad”, why doesn’t al-Qaeda have the right to decide some American is “bad”?[/li][li]3. It is cowardly to kill with robots; American human lives are not put at risk.[/li][/ul] My answers are: 1. There’s no way to avoid this calculus, except by minimizing “collateral damage” and _minimizing risk to innocents is in fact one of the advantages of drone strikes._ A more practical objection is that the strikes may influence “innocents” into becoming anti-American “bad guys.” 2. That’s the nature of Wars on Terror. The fact that Osama bin Laden sincerely thought America was evil didn’t make it wrong for America to (selfishly?) treat him as evil and seek his death. 3. This objection seems bizarre. A country should seek to protect the lives of its soldiers. Does OP seek a return to some romantic conception of the “Age of Chivalry”? If the U.S. can demonstrate that it can attack an enemy without putting its own soldiers at risk, that should dissuade the enemy from attacking which, at least from America’s viewpoint, is a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/162 "2012-10-12T19:34:56Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > There is a point where the positive side of the act (killing bad guys with drones) is outweighed by the negative side (killing children and innocents). I think this administration has done an outstanding job of telling people that they’ve never crossed that line, that every strike is undeniably necessary and the civilian casualties are minimal. I’m just not sure I believe them. > > I cited to this in the other thread, but here it is again. [A study by Stanford Law and NYU into drone attacks in Pakistan.](http://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/organization/149662/doc/slspublic/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf) It makes it pretty clear that the drone program may not be the necessary evil with minimal civilian casualties that we are told it is. Yep, I agree with that. And it makes us look like The Evil Empire. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/163 "2012-10-12T20:08:50Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > . . . My answers are: > > 1. There’s no way to avoid this calculus, except by minimizing “collateral damage” and _minimizing risk to innocents is in fact one of the advantages of drone strikes._ A more practical objection is that the strikes may influence “innocents” into becoming anti-American “bad guys.” That last point is troubling, I’d agree… One big problem here is that the enemy won’t wear uniforms. They masquerade as civilians, and, when they’ve planted their bombs or sniped or fired their mortars, they fade back into the civilian population around them. They, by their own tactics, are the ones putting innocents at risk. If that tactic were permitted to succeed, every army would march with a vanguard of children and nuns, knowing that the enemy could not fire at them. > [@](#): > > . . . 3. This objection seems bizarre. A country should seek to protect the lives of its soldiers. Does OP seek a return to some romantic conception of the “Age of Chivalry”? If the U.S. can demonstrate that it can attack an enemy without putting its own soldiers at risk, that should dissuade the enemy from attacking which, at least from America’s viewpoint, is a good thing. And how do drone attacks differ from any other modern weapons systems? Modern artillery fires from beyond the horizon; aircraft strike from above; battleships and bombers are more-or-less immune from harm. By the standards of a Renaissance nobleman, yes, modern war is cowardly. If we could revert all military technology to the standards of AD 1500, would that satisfy everyone’s objections? (Won’t anyone think of the horses?) ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/164 "2012-10-12T20:11:37Z")
The idea that war should be fought bravely is an absurdity. An anachronistic absurdity. War should be fought efficiently, with precision and minimal collateral damage in proportion to the value of military objectives. Everything else is window-dressing. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/165 "2012-10-12T21:12:04Z")
Our Achilles challenges their Hector to a duel, mano-a-mano. Achilles wins, and the losing faction slumps their shoulders, turns over Helen, and goes back to raising goats. Ah… the good old days. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/166 "2012-10-12T21:57:02Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > One big problem here is that the enemy won’t wear uniforms. They masquerade as civilians, and, when they’ve planted their bombs or sniped or fired their mortars, they fade back into the civilian population around them. They, by their own tactics, are the ones putting innocents at risk. Translation: they won’t act in a suicidal fashion against an enemy with huge military superiority. They are “supposed” to all put on uniforms and concentrate themselves in some place far from civilians where we can just kill them all at once without resistance. It’s silly to demand they fight in a way that gives us all the advantages and guarantees their deaths. They won’t do it; and even if they did, they’d promptly be killed by us and be replaced by those who won’t. > [@septimus](#): > > [ul][li]1. Does the end justify the means? I.e., how many bad guys must we kill to justify the killing of an innocent?[/ul]\[/li] > My answers are: > > 1. There’s no way to avoid this calculus, except by minimizing “collateral damage” and _minimizing risk to innocents is in fact one of the advantages of drone strikes._ That’s arguable, at best. > [@septimus](#): > > [ul][li] 2. What gives the U.S. a right to decide who is a bad guy? If the U.S. has the right to decide some al-Qaeda operative is “bad”, why doesn’t al-Qaeda have the right to decide some American is “bad”?[/ul]\[/li] > 2. That’s the nature of Wars on Terror. The fact that Osama bin Laden sincerely thought America was evil didn’t make it wrong for America to (selfishly?) treat him as evil and seek his death. Except Osama bin Laden has little to do with this. Nor does the “War of Terror” have much to do with fighting “Terror”. > [@septimus](#): > > [ul][li]3. It is cowardly to kill with robots; American human lives are not put at risk.[/li][/ul]\ > > 1. This objection seems bizarre. A country should seek to protect the lives of its soldiers. Does OP seek a return to some romantic conception of the “Age of Chivalry”? If the U.S. can demonstrate that it can attack an enemy without putting its own soldiers at risk, that should dissuade the enemy from attacking which, at least from America’s viewpoint, is a good thing. First; part of the objection is that “safe” aggression by drone encourages aggression. And second, it doesn’t discourage attacks because avoiding attacking America doesn’t keep us from attacking you anyway. It’s also an argument that justifies what we would call “terrorist” attacks, at least when they are directed at us. It’s a rather ironic argument to make from the side that complains that the other side won’t put on uniforms and “bravely” fight them in the open. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/167 "2012-10-12T22:00:04Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > It’s silly to demand they fight in a way that gives us all the advantages and guarantees their deaths. But it’s not silly to demand we fight in a way that gives them the advantage, right? For example, that we stop using drones. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/168 "2012-10-12T22:16:05Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > It’s silly to demand they fight in a way that gives us all the advantages and guarantees their deaths. Are you acknowledging that terrorist groups don’t care about civilian casualties, then? Because what he’s asking about are tactics that would reduce civilian casualties. Hiding amongst civilians guarantees greater civilian casualties (intentionally, of course). And that stuff about terrorists being civilians “for most purposes” is preposterous; you could say the exact thing about any kind of criminal. Nobody cares what they’re doing with the rest of their time. > [@](#): > > First; part of the objection is that “safe” aggression by drone encourages aggression. I asked you a page or two ago to back up this claim, and you haven’t. Are you going to? After years of drone strikes, if drone strikes led to more aggression there should be evidence, and I think the evidence points in the other direction. > [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > I beg to differ. The war on Terror is the same kind of amorphous, all consuming war that the wars in 1984 were, used to justify brutal acts against the enemy and restrictions on freedom just as they were. It’s about as exact an analog as you could ask for. Which has nothing to do with what **Kearsen** said in the post you were responding to. And yes, terrorism actually is amorphous. What’s the solution to that? Do nothing for fear of people on the internet shouting about Orwell? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/169 "2012-10-12T22:32:05Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Are you acknowledging that terrorist groups don’t care about civilian casualties, then? Because what he’s asking about are tactics that would reduce civilian casualties. And kill everyone who followed them. You might as well just hand them pistols and ask them to shoot themselves. And some “terrorist” groups care about civilian casualties (if only for political reasons), and some don’t. And quite a few of the people we kill aren’t terrorists in the first place, except in the sense of “anyone whom America doesn’t like is automatically a terrorist who deserves death”. > [@Marley23](#): > > Hiding amongst civilians guarantees greater civilian casualties (intentionally, of course). And that stuff about terrorists being civilians “for most purposes” is preposterous; you could say the exact thing about any kind of criminal. Nobody cares what they’re doing with the rest of their time. By that logic we should be using drone strikes on domestic criminals as well; and if random bystanders happen to get blown up with that drug dealer, too bad. Of course we won’t do that; it would involve killing too many white Christians. > [@Marley23](#): > > I asked you a page or two ago to back up this claim, and you haven’t. Are you going to? After years of drone strikes, if drone strikes led to more aggression there should be evidence, and I think the evidence points in the other direction. First, you are confusing two separate issues; I was just now referring to the safety of drone strikes encouraging more aggression by drone. And I did back up my earlier claim, and (inadvertently) so have all the people who say we (still!) need to attack people in retaliation for 9-11. ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/170 "2012-10-12T23:25:09Z")
No combatant in any war is entitled to sanctuary anywhere in the world. Therefore American drone deployment is morally acquitted for who it targets, and where they are targeted. Furthermore, there are in all war human and structural targets located too close to civilians for an attacker to avoid imperiling civilians. Therefore American drone deployment is morally acquitted for injury to civilians in the vicinity of the nightcreatures who are our targets. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/171 "2012-10-12T23:53:44Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Translation: they won’t act in a suicidal fashion against an enemy with huge military superiority. They are “supposed” to all put on uniforms and concentrate themselves in some place far from civilians where we can just kill them all at once without resistance. > > It’s silly to demand they fight in a way that gives us all the advantages and guarantees their deaths. They won’t do it; and even if they did, they’d promptly be killed by us and be replaced by those who won’t. . . . I largely agree. At the same time, though, it’s also silly for them to engage in this style of warfare, and, simultaneously, complain about civilian casualties. I don’t care if you’re hiding behind a nun and five orphans: if you shoot at me, I’m going to shoot back. Their deaths are at least as much on your conscience as mine. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/172 "2012-10-12T23:56:13Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > They masquerade as civilians, and, when they’ve planted their bombs or sniped or fired their mortars, they fade back into the civilian population around them. They _are_ civilians. I can’t find the link at the moment, but one of the guys that was targeted was visiting his in-laws when he was bombed. That’s not a dirty, sneaky terrorist choosing to wear babies as armour, that’s him being a person. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2012, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/173 "2012-10-12T23:58:19Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > . . . Hiding amongst civilians guarantees greater civilian casualties (intentionally, of course). . . . You think so? I’m not sure, but don’t know enough to say. I would have said the civilian deaths are not intentional by either side. We’re shooting at the enemy; the enemy is hiding in pretty much the only place he can hide. Forests and ravines and rocks don’t cut it any more, now we have IR sensing drones. Hiding in cities is just about all that’s left. I don’t want to think that the enemy is so evil as to cause civilian deaths among his own population on purpose. Am I giving them too much moral credit? ---
**Author:** ![Erdosain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/erdosain/32/7284_2.png) [@Erdosain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erdosain)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/174 "2012-10-13T00:08:18Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Because when espionage missions are successful (which I deduce is most of the time, given the paucity of stories like [this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahmoud_Al-Mabhouh)), there actually is - literally - no collateral damage. I actually think this is the crux of the OP’s problem. He imagines a world where James Bond is real and SEAL teams are offing Al Qaeda’s lieutenants on a weekly basis and no one knows! The reason for the paucity of stories like Mahmoud Al-Manhouh is because they don’t happen. (And notice it was the Israelis who had the assets to kill Al-Manhouh, not America.) The choice isn’t between 007 and dropping a missle on them. It’s between dropping a missle and doing absolutely nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/175 "2012-10-13T00:11:13Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > They _are_ civilians. I can’t find the link at the moment, but one of the guys that was targeted was visiting his in-laws when he was bombed. That’s not a dirty, sneaky terrorist choosing to wear babies as armour, that’s him being a person. And the numbers in the report linked in this thread still show a 75% bad guy / 25% civilian ratio. That was a dirty, sneaky terrorist who put his in-laws at risk. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/176 "2012-10-13T00:12:27Z")
> [@Erdosain](#): > > I actually think this is the crux of the OP’s problem. He imagines a world where James Bond is real and SEAL teams are offing Al Qaeda’s lieutenants on a weekly basis and no one knows! The reason for the paucity of stories like Mahmoud Al-Manhouh is because they don’t happen. (And notice it was the Israelis who had the assets to kill Al-Manhouh, not America.) > > The choice isn’t between 007 and dropping a missle on them. It’s between dropping a missle and doing absolutely nothing. And Israeli hit squads have killed the wrong people in the past as well. > **[Lillehammer affair](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillehammer_affair)** > > The Lillehammer affair (Hebrew: פרשת לילהאמר, Parshat Lillehammer, Norwegian: Lillehammer-saken) was the murder of Ahmed Bouchikhi, a Moroccan waiter and the brother of the French musician Chico Bouchikhi, by Mossad agents in Lillehammer, Norway, on 21 July 1973. The Israeli agents had mistaken their target for Ali Hassan Salameh, the chief of operations for Black September. Six of 15 of the Mossad team were captured and convicted of complicity in the killing by the Norwegian justice system Un... ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/177 "2012-10-13T00:15:09Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I don’t want to think that the enemy is so evil as to cause civilian deaths among his own population on purpose. Am I giving them too much moral credit? [![](https://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/HamasHumanShields.gif) ](https://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/HamasHumanShields.gif) [![](https://tundratabloids.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pali-humanshields.jpg) ](https://tundratabloids.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/pali-humanshields.jpg) [http://blog.camera.org/archives/HumanShields.jpg](http://blog.camera.org/archives/HumanShields.jpg) [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/giJlG3KXq8c/hqdefault.jpg "Hamas Terrorists Use Innocent Civilians As Human Shields") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giJlG3KXq8c) > **[New report says Hamas used kids as human shields](https://jweekly.com/2010/03/19/new-report-says-hamas-used-kids-as-human-shields/)** > > Hamas gunmen used Palestinian children as human shields during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip last year, according to a new Israeli report released March 15. The detailed 500-page \[…\] ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/178 "2012-10-13T00:22:25Z")
> [@Erdosain](#): > > I actually think this is the crux of the OP’s problem. He imagines a world where James Bond is real and SEAL teams are offing Al Qaeda’s lieutenants on a weekly basis and no one knows! The reason for the paucity of stories like Mahmoud Al-Manhouh is because they don’t happen. (And notice it was the Israelis who had the assets to kill Al-Manhouh, not America.) > > The choice isn’t between 007 and dropping a missle on them. It’s between dropping a missle and doing absolutely nothing. That you think the entire population of Pakistan belongs to “Al Qaeda” is no less living in a comic book than whatever you are accusing this guy of, but only one of you is using your fantastic delusions to justify mass murder. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/179 "2012-10-13T00:25:57Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > And Israeli hit squads have killed the wrong people in the past as well. > [Lillehammer affair - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillehammer_affair) Moreover, the Mossad isn’t remotely as effective as so many people think. A recent book written by an Israeli Colonel on Israel’s actions in the aftermath of the Munich Massacre found that while Israel had knocked off a number of Palestinians loosely connected with Black September they’d only managed to kill just one person remotely involved in the Munich operation. This is something that shouldn’t have been a shock to anyone familiar with the situation. In reality, all of “the bastards”(to use Golda Meir’s term) were hiding in Arab countries or behind the Iron Curtain, not palling around Western Europe. However, both the Israelis and the Palestinians had something to gain by perpetrating the myth so the PLO turned several dead flunkies into Black September big shots and the Israelis promoted this myth of the invincible Mossad. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2012, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440/180 "2012-10-13T00:28:10Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > That you think the entire population of Pakistan belongs to “Al Qaeda” is no less living in a comic book than whatever you are accusing this guy of, but only one of you is using your fantastic delusions to justify mass murder. Where in that post did he claim that the entire population of Pakistan belonged to Al Quaeda? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americans-how-do-you-morally-justify-drone-strikes-in-the-war-on-terror/637440.md?page=10)