It may surprise you to know, but journalism is all about asking experts the questions, and then making sure that you understand the answers, and know why the answers are as they are. Frequently you have contradictory answers from different parties and interest groups, and you have to weigh them up and take advice as to their relative merit.
If I simply spouted the kind of lame twaddle that I could come up with off the top of my head, or from an uncritical reading of open sources, I'd be a columnist (a Max Hastings or a Lewis Page), who thought that my own opinions were of interest, rather than a journo, who knows only too well that my only value is as a filter and collator - as a conduit for information and ideas, not a source.
There are, in other words, air power experts and practitioners who disagree with you, and it's a synthesis of their views that I'm regurgitating.
The advantages and benefits of UAVs are undeniable - and are very well known. The drawbacks, weaknesses, pitfalls and shortcomings are less often discussed, resulting in this ridiculous notion that UAVs can do 90% of FJ tasks at 10% of the cost.
Which is, I'm assured, absolute and complete bollocks.