Lethal employment of uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAVs) has risen precipitously by a few Western nation-states (most notably the United States) across several theaters of operation (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and other locations).1 The emergence of this technology has sparked widespread debate over the ethical justification of its use. Some claim these drones create a particularly asymmetrical form of warfare that is somehow ignoble or dishonorable. Others contend that UAVs impede certain jus in bello principles. Some claim that drones create psychological conflicts for their operators (who are often thousands of miles away) causing unacceptable cognitive dissonance in the mindset of the warrior. Still others raise concerns over drones carrying out targeted killings by non-military government agencies (such as the CIA) and other concerns over their present employment. There is a worry that UAVs could lead to autonomous weapons that make lethal decisions on their own. Finally, some argue that by removing the pilot from the theater of

combat a degree of asymmetrical warfare is attained such that the risk threshold for a given state is lowered too far - that it becomes too easy for a state using drones to go to war; thus, their use is ethically pernicious.