Long New York Times story -here-.

Some commentary -here-.

There is new territory here. The situation is similar to what presidents and military officials had to work out when air war became technologically possible.

A lot of people have problems with the drone attacks, particularly when civilians are killed. But my primary question is, “compared to what?”

If you are going to carry out military attacks on a non-national enemy who is already at war with us, are there better ideas?

As I said in another post, there are difficulties here, but I think we’ve come a hell of long way from carpet bombing and Hiroshima.

There was an -article- in my newspaper a couple of days ago. An investigation of an airstrike that killed a family of eight.

This made the papers. It was a New York Times story.

It’s unclear if this was a drone attack, or conventional airstrik, but imagine an news story something like that in WWII, where something like 50 million civilians died. Or Vietnam, for that matter, where some civilian death estimates in Indochina go as high as 5 million.

In my opinion, we’ve come a long way.