Making Sense...?
Okay, let's see if I've got this one right:
UAVs are good because they don't hazard our people, and replace more expensive manned aircraft.
So.... when one gets shot down, we have to send a helicopter (expensive) to deliver special forces personnel (expensive) to the crash site (dangerous) to recover kit we don't want bad guys to get while being covered by a Harrier (really expensive) which then uses a PGB (ungodly expensive) to blow the thing up (dangerous).
Is it just me, or is there a flaw in the military thinking here?