I don't know what the CIA's rules of engagement are, but I know if I were the one pulling the trigger, yes, I'd want 100% certainty I'm nailing the right guy.

Damn right I would.

It is true that there are many aspects of warfare where absolutely certainty is unachievable, but in this conflict, we need to require the highest levels of verification before snuffing out people's lives.

It's true as well that, in the heat of battle, mistakes are sometimes made, but at this stage of this conflict, our forces are not in extremis with their backs to the wall, or in any great peril from a few roaming Taliban or al Qaeda to the point where rash, hasty, or even urgent action needs to be taken.

And what of intelligence?

Dead men tell no tales. Doesn't anyone consider the possibility of keeping these suspects under surveillance until their identities can be verified, and see what develops in the meanwhile, instead of just blowing them away with Hellfires?

sp