This is what is proposed by Strawser and also by philosopher Jeff McMahan, both of whom totally reject the thesis of “the moral equality of the combatants” and replace it by a unilateral right to kill founded upon a concept of justa causa. “The warrior fighting for a just cause is morally justified to take the life of the enemy combatant,” writes Strawser, “whereas the unjust fighter is not justified, even if they follow the traditional principles of jus in bello [such as only targeting combatants and the like], to kill the justified fighter.” I have the right to kill, you do not. Why? Because I am just and you are unjust. I am good, you are bad, and only the good have the right to kill the bad. That, by and large, is what the puerile logic of this type of reasoning boils down to. The enemy’s reply to this will of course be that he is the good one, the opponent is the bad one, so it is in truth he who has the right to kill the other . . . and so it will continue until one of the two ends by winning the day, thereby providing, through force, irrefutable proof of his own right.

Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, loc. 532