节目一开始，约翰就提到了奥巴马政府的无人机袭击是多么普遍。肯怂恿约翰同意无人机袭击至少对美国人更好，因为它减少了平民的死亡。约翰被这种想法弄糊涂了;如果我们想避免平民死亡，为什么要使用无人机袭击呢?肯介绍了两个关键问题之间的简单区别:我们是否应该在战争中使用无人机，或者我们是否应该开战?约翰反驳说，这些问题实际上是纠缠不清的。肯会不择手段的。

John and Ken invite Bradley Strawser to the show, a Professor of Philosophy at the Naval Postgraduate School. Strawser starts off recalling how he ended up at this Air Force academy with many of his students possibly getting involved in drone combat. He goes on to clarify the host’s initial squabble, interjecting that the potential moral gains reaped by drone warfare end up allowing it to be used more carelessly. Ken challenges whether the technology itself is morally neutral. Strawser is more skeptical whether technology has ever been neutral.

Responding to an audience question, Strawser explains his qualms about autonomous drones fighting wars on their own. John draws a parallel to the moral decisions self-driving cars may have to make in the future. Another audience member asks about the technology and ethics of assassinations. The conversation veers towards the atrocities of nuclear weapons. A question from the audience incites a discussion of the terrorizing effects of a drone constantly looming over a population.

John presses Strawser on the lack of democratic accountability of the necessarily secretive drone program. Ken returns to the unintended consequences of decreasing the public cost of war by the use of drones. The show ends by touching on a variety of interesting points—from the human cost of operating drones and the effects of the internet to military ethical education.

• Roving Philosophical Report (seek to 6:28):Shuka Kalantari讲述了美国军方雇佣的首批无人机操作员之一的故事。布兰登·布莱恩特描述了他被推到这个角色的令人不安的故事，以及之后他面临的个人斗争。
• 60 Second Philosopher (seek to 47:07):Ian Shoales covers some of the major historical advancements in the history of military weapons, with a particular emphasis on the longbow.