You might want to rephrase that.

I'm assuming, since you provided no link, that this is probably the documentary. Sorry about the YouTube link. The one at BBC won't play in the U.S.

Two points:

1) I would bet money I've done a hell of a lot more research on this than you have, from multiple sources across the political map.

2) The casualty figures from those sources are all over the map. Not just two conflicting answers, or four, but dozens.

My take on it:

I'm having trouble buying the really low numbers from the CIA, military, and administration, and I'm having a lot of trouble buying the really high numbers from the people we're attacking. Both have a proven history of cooking numbers.

The real numbers are almost certainly somewhere in between, which isn't much help, but even the high numbers are far less than any other military solution against these terrorists would provide.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism has extensive details and estimates on covert strikes in Pakistan, Somali, and Yemem. This is the "go to" site for many other sources, including Wikipedia. I find these numbers to be acceptable as working numbers until something better comes along. Their range for civilian casualties is 451 at the low end to 1,047 at the high end.

"Thousands of civilians" is a bit hyperbolic.

The only real alternative to the drone attack strategy--if casualties are the primary driver--is no military solution at all, which could be discussed separately.

I can find no record of any friendly troops being killed by drones except two Americans in April of 2011.