If you consider drone strikes to be indiscriminate, compare the upper bound of about 6,000[1] or so drone strike casualties over more than a decade to the 90,000[2] or so Vietnam bombing casualties, which in turn is dwarfed by the World War 2 bombing casualties[3]. Compared to the alternative of using traditional bombers or using ground forces, drone strikes represent a huge reduction in civilian casualties.

I don't understand the people who protest drone strikes. War is hell - if your country engages in any sort of violent military intervention, there will be civilian casualties. I can get behind opposing unnecessary usage of military force; I can get behind opposing attacks within the borders of a sovereign nation that we aren't at war with. Protesting the tools used to conduct war instead of the war itself makes little sense to me, particularly when that tool marks a dramatic improvement in reducing civilian casualties.

[1] https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/dron...

[2] http://thevietnamwar.info/operation-rolling-thunder/

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_strat...