No one here will dispute the notion that CIA-operated drones kill civilians. There were plenty of examples between 2004 through 2010 of such drone strikes killing more than just militants under both Presidents Bush and Obama. However, one common myth is that drone strikes rarely ever hit actual militants. Some even claim the civilian-to-militant ratio is 10-1 or even 100-1. Those numbers are fictional.
Infact, the quality of drone strikes appears to have increased just as much as their quantity. A new study says that because of 2010's drone strikes, the ratio of civilians-to-militants killed in drone strikes is about 1-10. Anecdotal evidence suggests it's much lower.
In May of 2010, Brian Glyn Williams of U. Mass
published a study that put the figure below the 30% that the New American Foundation had put out. In Williams' research, only 3.5% can be confirmed as civilians while almost 20% are "unknown", creating a range of 3.5%-22.5%. But there was something different about the drone strikes of 2010 and the drone strikes of 2004-2009.
Amir Rana of the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, May 2010;
"Since late 2009, the targeting has improved. Before, in late 2008, early 2009, there was high collateral damage."
Incase you've been living under a rock, 2010 has been a record year for drone strikes. 77 already this year, and indications are that the pace set in September will be kept high. But there has been no indication that this dramatic increase in quantity has effected their quality in any negative way.
In the same article, other sources offer reasons for why civilian death have plummeted;
A reporter asserted, "(The militants) don't sleep among the population anymore because they are afraid of being exposed. They sleep in ditches, and in the mountains in tents."
The second reason appears to be adjustments made by the CIA. According to Roggio, "There is great emphasis put on limiting civilian casualties. This is why vehicles are often hit. And the weapons selection --smaller, more focused warheads -- are also used specifically to limit civilian casualties."
The New America Foundation has gone from claiming a 30% civilian casualty rate during the strikes of 2004-2009 to about a 10% casualty rate today. Others, including government sources, claim that almost no civilians have died this year- a claim which would be better proved if evidence were provided. I will say that of all the reports on individual drone strikes that I have read this year, over 70 now, I can use one hand to count the times when civilians definitely got caught in the cross-fire. There was one incident when a teacher and his son were killed, several members of Mutafa Abu al-Yazid's family who were present when he was targeted, and one recent incident in which four children died along with several women. In total as of today, there have been approximately 77 drone strikes this year in FATA.
The public position on drones is weak. By saying nothing, the U.S. appears to implicitly suggest that there is something wrong about them but they're going to continue and increase them anyways. It's no wonder there is so much misinformation about them.