This morning we are asking our viewers to weigh in on the use of drones to combat terrorism. For those who support those efforts, the phone number this morning is 202 7488000. For those who oppose those efforts, 202 7488001. You can also catch up with us on social media on twitter, facebook or email us at journal at sea span c span. Com. The front page of the wall street journal. The story noting that president obama heightened rules for the u. S. Strong program in 2013 but he secretly approved a waiver doing the Central Intelligence agency more flexibility in pakistan than anywhere else. The story noting that though support for the Program Remains strong across the u. S. Government, the killings have renewed a debate within the administration over whether the cia should now be reigned in or meet tighter standards that apply to draw programs outside of pakistan. We will be spending our first 45 minutes on todays show talking about the u. S. Drone program. It was also the subject of some of the discussion on yesterdays sunday shows. Here senator john mccain on cnns state of the union. Being asked about drone strikes that were detailed by the president last week. [video clip] i think it was probably preventable in that there was an obvious breakdown in intelligence. They did not know they were there. All of our prayers and thoughts are with their families. It was obviously preventable but the question is, do we continue these drone strikes and how important are they. It raises all of those questions and it is a subject for review by both intelligence and Armed Services committees and the entire congress. I notice after the president s admission of the strikes and the tragedy that occurred that both he and the white house did not use the word drone and they did not say the cias program existed. We do know that to be a fact. Isnt that right . Yes. There is an internal struggle going on within the administration and within the congress as to whether there should be an Armed Services operation. Or should it be done by the cia. I have some bias but it seems to me that as much as we could give a responsibility and authority over to the department of defense that is not really the job of the Intelligence Agency. Back to your question. I think that raises the debate. Do we need to continue drone strikes and if so, how . Better intelligence. We are now facing a new form of warfare. These nonstate organizations that are spread all over hells half acre. The only way you can get at them that we know of now that is viable is through the Drone Operations. Host senator john mccain on cnns state of the union yesterday. He asked do we need to continue drunk strikes and if so, how . Drone strikes, and if so how. Good morning to you. Guest thanks for good morning. Host thanks for joining us to talk about this. Talk about the difference between suspected terrorists that are on kill lists and signature strikes we heard the term signature strikes we heard from officials in the wake of last week. Guest this is an issue that goes back to the beginning of the obama administration. How do you conduct warfare in this new era against terrorism across multiple states countries, regions and do it in real time . To go after individuals that the u. S. Government deems are combatants across a large battlefield. Drone strikes have been employed successfully frequently. And without apology by this administration to conduct that warfare. The signature try issue goes to the choice of the president. Signing off on a waiver to give permission to kill an individual overseas without trial. Without making them a prisoner of war. That has been a foundation of this administrations counterterrorism policy. With last weeks events, it is a tragedy but it is a tragedy the president seems to take personally with the speech. It is also something i do not think is going to change significantly on how these drone strikes are used. Host the president is talking a lot about the Drone Program especially i highprofile speech back in 2013. What we know about who signs off on individual strikes and what precautions are there to prevent civilian casualties . Guest they go up the chain of command. Jeh johnson who is now the dhs secretary, formerly he was the general counsels top lawyer. Every strike came up to him and he was signing off before it would head to the white house and the president. That is a good thing that you have that authority. That chain of authority. If this is the way we conduct warfare, why are we having individuals in different buildings in washington that have to personally signed the papers to make this happen . In the case were talking about here in pakistan, is the cias Drone Program. To go back to what you were discussing in the beginning that is the debate that has been going on for a long time, how long or should at all these drone strikes be conducted by the cia or the military. It leaves the perception that there are more checks and balances in the military or at least more transparent ones. Jeh johnson gave a speech before he became dhs secretary in which he argued to make that shift to bring authority to the department of defense. It has not happened. The president said there will be a review. There is a healthy dose of skepticism that the review is going to do that. That the Intelligence Agency is going to get up what has become key or fundamental of what they do. Host you talked about some of the history of this program. The bureau of Investigative Journalism is trying to keep track of some of the stats specifically in pakistan from 2004 to 2015 according to their numbers 415 total strikes. That includes 364 that were done under president obamas administration. The estimate for total killed is somewhere between 2450 two nearly 4000 people. Possibly including 423 to 900 622 civilians. If you could talk about including 420 32 962 civilians. Guest i know that what changes as of the war in iraq ending and the war it in afghanistan increasing, the war in afghanistan became a proving ground for more of these drone strikes, especially by cia. It became the covert war where no ground troop could cross the border. Because of the relationship between Pakistani Intelligence Services and the cia, drones became how america could chase bad guys across the border to pakistan. That became the favorite weapon across the middle east as well. Drones are headquartered at djibouti, africa where they can take off. When obama came in, he approved a surge of troops on the ground in afghanistan and drew down the iraq war. The Drone Program was doubled down on. President obama is the driving force in going to authorize all of this. Host kevin baron is the executive editor of defense one. Thanks for your help this morning on some of the history and debates that are happening now. Guest i hope it was something that helped the program. Host we are asking viewers to weigh in on the use of drones to combat terrorism. We have two lines, whether you support or oppose. For those who support, 202 7488000. Those who oppose, 202 7488001. We will start on that line for those who support. John is in industry, pennsylvania. Caller good morning. Thank you for having me. I am a military veteran of a Drone Program and i do support the use of drones, not just because i was part of a squadron but because i feel like there is a stigma attached to it that is unfair in comparison to the rest of the weapons we use in the military. The squadron i was with in the marine corps, we were essentially surveillance. We painted a target for artillery and nobody thought twice about that. About dropping artillery on the enemy and the drone was simply the window of where to shoot. Now they are having an issue with the fact that the drone is there taking a picture and shooting the weapon. I dont hear a lot of comparison about the civilians or the innocent people that are killed with artillery or any other weapon we had in the military in comparison to drones. It is more the stigma about the fact that the drone shot the artillery or whatever it used to kill people. That is the part im having a hard time with. We are not comparing it to the weapons we have always had. Host why do you think there is a difference in peoples minds if they feel differently from an artillery shell versus a hellfire missile on a drone . Caller i honestly believe it is the fact it is the back of their mind idea that nobody knew that thing was there. That jet or helicopter. You can hear artillery. You have to have a certain distance from a large body of water so it is almost implied that that is a possibility that you can have artillery. With a drone, you dont know it is there. In the back of peoples minds they think, if we allow this, we are saying we are allowing it to be in the United States. It is almost like the concept of saying it is ok, we are saying it is ok for all Drone Operations all over the world. I think that is unfair to say that by allowing drones to shoot terrorists overseas that we are also going to allow drones to spy on us in the United States. I think it is a valid argument that needs to be had at idle think we should be comparing one to the other i dont think we should be compared one to the other. Host do you think there should be more transparency about casualties and injuries that happen under drone strikes or do you think it matters . Congress adam schiff, a democrat working with republican walter jones. They have tried to introduce bills requiring an annual reporting of drone casualties. Do you think that is something americans should know about . Caller i would say this. Because i feel it should be under dod, i think if people smarter than me believe we should have that kind of transparency, it should be for all civilians killed in all operations of combat, not focusing on drones only. Host whether it be artillery shells, airstrikes or drones . All of them together . Caller yes. Host thanks for the call. Darrell is up next on the line for those who oppose the use of drones to combat terrorism. Good morning. Caller good morning. I am totally against drone use. It proves one thing, that is that americans are the number one terrorist on the planet. If you look at all the wars we of been in since 9 11, we are they were all created and caused by america. The drone use just shows what we really are. Wait until people start using drones on us and see how your whole attitude changes toward drones. Watch the movie oblivion. Host for you it is not just the drones. It is the entire war on terror . Caller the whole war is nothing but bowl. All you have to do is look at it. How can you have a war on terror . Host we want to hear from our viewers on the use of drones to combat terrorism. Let us know whether you support or oppose. Gonzo is up next. Line for those who support. Caller how are you doing . Host im good. Caller for me it comes down to the ends do not justify the means. Innocent americans. Youve got laurent duper day who was injured. It really opened my eyes on unnecessary drone use. I believe it breaks international law. I could cite former u. N. Members. Drone strikes break human rights treaties. Paying just in houston or drafting a whiteout. Host here is how the Editorial Board of usa today puts it. Drone strikes of the best of a series of bad options. Terrorist leaders cannot be left alone to plot in havens. That was what allowed al qaeda to mount 9 11 attacks. Striking them with aircraft is more distracted and sending in troops is still more deadly to civilians in service members. What is not widely known is that strikes have fallen sharply since their peak in 2010. The pakistan count fell to 24 last year and five so far this year. Perhaps that means there are fewer leaders to target or perhaps it means the government is exercising greater restraint. Either would be a marker of progress. We want to hear from our viewers this morning. 202 7488000 if you support the use of drones. 202 7488001 is the line for those who oppose. His conversation coming because of the president s statements on thursday talking about those attacks that happened in january that caused the death of Warren Weinstein and two other american citizens who had been working for and fighting for al qaeda. We will show you a bit from the speech on thursday. [video clip] i profoundly regret what happened. On behalf of the United States government, i offer our deepest apologies to the families. As soon as we determine the cause of their deaths, i directed that the existence of this operation be disclosed publicly. I did so because the weinstein and low puerto families deserve to know the truth. Even as certain aspects of our efforts have two remain secret in order to succeed, the United States is a democracy, committed to openness in good times and bad. Our initial assessment indicates this operation was fully consistent with the guidelines under which we conduct counterterrorism efforts in the region which has been our focus for years because it is the home of al qaedas leadership. Based on the intelligence we obtained at the time, including hundreds of hours of surveillance, we believed that this was an al qaeda compound, that no civilians were present and that capturing these terrorists was not possible. We believe the operation did take out dangerous members of al qaeda. What we did not know, tragically , is that al qaeda was hiding the presence of warren and giovanni in this compound. It is a cruel and bitter truth that in the fog of war generally and our fight against terrorists specifically mistakes, sometimes deadly mistakes, can occur. Host on the editorial pages of the usa today on friday, Camille Jaffer writes many deaths little information. He writes that the president s remarks made clear that even those inside the government do not always know who the drone strikes are killing. The United States killed two innocent hostages they did not know were there. The same strike killed someone the late the government only later learned was an american. They know so little about who is in their sites. The disclosures are also a reminder of how little we know about a program that has been responsible for so many death. S. Ron is up next on the line for those who oppose the use of drones. Caller good morning. I would like to say i regret i voted for obama. I regret that i voted for obama in 2008. I did not vote for him in 2012 because i found him to be a warmonger. Im against drone strikes because you are killing a lot of innocent people, women and children. When you kill these folks over there, they go they dont go to a psychologist to help them out with their problems. The u. S. And israel are the terrorists of the world. Youre killing muslims by the hundreds of thousands every year. I regret that i voted for obama. Host what is the better option here . I was read from usa today earlier that went through conventional aircraft could cause more destruction putting u. S. Service members on the line might cause more u. S. Deaths. What is the better option . Caller the best option in the world is for the u. S. To get out of the middle east and for israel to stop killing the palestinians. People will be upset. People are killing white people are killing so many brown and black people in the world it is a shame. When you find out, when people call in this morning it will be all white folks calling in for the killing of other people because white folks like to kill people. It is in their blood to kill host google on to arthur in chesapeake we will go on to arthur in chesapeake virginia. Caller if you can do it in one place, you can do it in another. Right here in america you have terrorists all over. If you can do drones to attack people all overseas, you should use them right here in america. Your ku klux klan, white supremacist groups. Training to kill people. They come out from those camps and join the police force just to kill people of color. You need to send some drones and search out these terrorist camps right here in america and wipe them out. If you can use drones in one place, it use them everywhere. Right here in america. Host arthur in chesapeake, virginia. John is up next on that line for those who support the use of drones. Good morning. Caller good morning. We support using drones but you have to have human intelligence on the ground to run these programs. It cant just use a sim card in a cell phone because you think someone is there and drop a bomb on a building. Your other caller was referring to white people are killing black and brown people. These people are terrorists. It is unfortunate if you kill a house full of terrorists and there are kids and wives and things like that. Where are they going to go . What do you think they will end up doing . Its like when they say they are releasing prisoners from gitmo like they are going to do something else. They are terrorists. That is what they are bred to do. They are jihadists. Host your first point, concern that the use of drones is making killing to automatic and mechanical by computer, do you think we have taken the Human Element out of the hunt for terrorists and made it less of a big decision to actually call the trigger on someone . Caller i dont have insight to that. The facts are you need to know who you are killing. You need to know whos there. Perhaps it would be better there is a reason that president bush put together the prison camp in Guantanamo Bay for these people. The problem is you have these dogooders who dont have a concept. A lot of people in america dont really have a sense of what the rest of the world looks like because things thank god we live in america, however a lot of people who have not traveled outside of this country do not grasp poor people in america are not the same as poor people in the rest of the world. Host here is a picture that goes with wall street journal story today that we showed you. Pakistani protesters from last year at a demonstration against u. S. Drone strikes. You can see their signs and that picture saying stop illegal drone strikes. On our twitter page, drones are a great piece of modern warfare. Edward writes, there is no good way to fight a war. Accidents happen but look at the cost. We want to hear from our viewers for the next 20 minutes or so. Your thoughts on the use of drones, especially in light of those revelations of the attacks in january, one of which caused the death of Warren Weinstein, a u.