Once again, the moral debate on drones is boiling. 

Earlier this month, Esquire published a feature article by Tom Junod, called “The Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama,” that was critical of the Obama administration’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles, otherwise know as drones, among other tactics. 

Days later, the New York Times ran a news analysis by Scott Shane, called “The Moral Case for Drones,” that cited a number of sources who applauded Obama’s replacement of broader bombing efforts with precise attacks carried out by drones.

John Kaag and Sarah Kreps are now trying to make sense of this divide in this article. I suggest reading the entire thing.