This is a Cato Special Podcast. I'm Caleb Brown. Drone strikes used in Afghanistan and Pakistan have drawn fire from conservatives and liberals, though for different reasons.

But if the United States engagement in Afghanistan is going to be a long

one, it's time to understand the legitimate uses of drone strikes. David Ritgers is a

legal policy analyst at the Cato Institute. He served three tours in Afghanistan

as a Special Forces officer and continues

to serve as a reserve judge advocate.

I need to begin by saying that any views I express

are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the

Department of Defense or the Department of the Army.

What is the liberal criticism of using these drone strikes?

The liberal criticism is that they should be referred to as extra judicial killings or non-judicial

killings.

And this is a pretty invalid criticism of using force on the battlefield in any other situation

whether we're using a tank or a bomb or a gun, we would never ask the courts or Congress to

step in and micromanage the tactical employment of force.

And that extends here by analogy to drones.

And in this instance, I think that the legal system,

there certainly has to be a vetting process.

There has to be a vetting process on both

the accuracy and reliability of intelligence

and proportionality is also one of the principles of the laws and

armed conflict we're going to have to employ. Certainly we couldn't have

...