Drone strikes have been around since the first recorded use of one in 1849 when the Austrians used pilotless balloons against revolutinary citizens in Venice. However, since 9/11 we have used drones to kill suspected terrorists in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and other countries.

Those who are for using drones say that they have decimated terrorist networks abroad via precise strikes with minimal civilian casualties. They say drones are relatively inexpensive weapons, are used under proper government oversight, and that their use helps prevent "boots on the ground" combat and makes America safer.

Opponents say that drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill. They contend that drone strikes kill large numbers of civilians (sources say 8-17% of casualties are civilians), violate international law, lack sufficient congressional oversight, violate the sovereignty of other nations, and make the horrors of war appear as innocuous as a video game.

What do you think?