This is the kind of question I would expect to see in a highschool debate club when a debater is losing the argument. It's an emotionally loaded red herring which is designed to derail discussion, not further it.

This is the kind of ad hominem attack used by middle school debaters to avoid refuting an argument.

lol. very good sir.

Is that what we're talking about? I thought we were talking about drone strikes which are targeted assassinations that, so far, have had considerable "collateral damage" (i.e. death of innocents).

The sad truth is that the American assassination campaign is little better than one that would be carried out using car bombs. Though had those methods been used it would be much easier to place in a more accurate moral context.

Do you imagine that drone strikes will stop them?

Other than that, I'd like to echo the obvious [citation needed]. Which terrorists are launching missiles from what schools at whom? And did someone actually authorize a drone strike on a school in retaliation?

I should think that it's pretty clear that if you blow up a school, you're probably evil no matter your reasoning. I'm not saying there never has been or will be a case to blow up a school, but you'd better be pretty damn sure.