Where there is competent and willing local law enforcement, the U.S. is not launching drones. Where such law enforcement is impossible, what then?<\/p>\n
Religious critics of drones rarely offer specific alternatives. Instead, they morally fault drones for imprecision, susceptible to harming innocents, and impersonally guided by desk-bound pilots who, with their bureaucratic overlords, may be cavalier because they are themselves not at risk. The anti-drone letter from Mainline Protestants cited \u201cremote, technical warfare,\u201d\u009d which has the \u201cpotential to encourage overuse and extension of the policy to more countries and more perceived threats.\u201d\u009d But almost all forms of modern warfare are \u201cremote\u201d\u009d and \u201ctechnical.\u201d\u009d Combatants no longer typically battle each other with swords and lances.<\/p>\n
Absent the option of effective law enforcement against terrorists, the range of options include conventional aerial bombing or cruise missiles, both of which are pretty \u201cremote,\u201d\u009d or a military personnel excursion similar to the U.S. Navy SEAL mission that dispatched Osama bin Laden.<\/p>\n