They don't reduce "enemy collateral damage", though. In fact, the collateral fatalities from drone attacks are one of the highest at 98%, according to some estimates [1]. Compare this to estimated civillian casualty rate of 60% in WWII [2] and around 50% in Vietnam [3] (distorted figures because anyone in a "free-fire" zone is considered the enemy).

The intelligence for drone strikes are based on patterns, such as a party of men carrying guns or a group of unknown people plotting something. And so these strikes routinely -- and sometimes deliberately -- target wedding parties [4], funerals, and rescue workers [5], and children [6].

Add to this the psychological trauma of constantly living under the threat of drones [7], it is no wonder citizens of countries where these programs are carried out hold somewhat of a grudge against the US [8]. You can call it signature strike, or whatever you want, the fact is that bombs do not know the difference between combatants and women/children/civilians. They kill indiscriminately. So forgive me if I don't see the "advantage" of using drones over boots on the ground or see how they are "better".

[1] http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/opinion/bergen-obama-drone/ind...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

[3] http://www.vn-agentorange.org/edmaterials/cost_of_vn_war.htm...

[4] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57448041/afghanistan-off...

[5] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drone...

[6] http://tribune.com.pk/story/229844/the-day-69-children-died/

[7] http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Stan...

[8] http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/27/pakistani-public-opinion...