When I saw this report, I immediately thought of Obama's new orders restricting CIA interrogations and shutting down secret prisons. What's the connection between striking targets in Pakistan and restrictions on the CIA? It illustrates, once again, the lack of logical reasoning demonstrated by Obama and by many of his supporters.
Air strikes, no matter how precise, carry a high risk of collateral damage. That is, they tend to kill innocent civilians. Even if they get their target, they often kill or main innocent victims. That's just a fact of life, and is true of many types of military operations. In addition, air strikes are usually highly visible events, that can't be easily concealed. When a U.S. strike kills innocent people it causes a great deal of anger and resentment. It undermines attempts to gain popular support in the area in question, and often produces criticism abroad. Sometimes, through bad intelligence or sheer accident, strikes kill the wrong people entirely, and don't even have the benefit of eliminating any actual targets.
Obama, and some of his supporters, believe that air strikes such as those used in Pakistan, are a necessary part of the war against terror. They are willing to accept dead civilians, mistaken targets, maimed children, negative world opinion, increased hostility in parts of Afghanistan & Pakistan, and every other drawback that accompanies these air strikes. But the very same people who are fine with these air attacks, whine and snivel at the thought that a few terrorist suspects might be secretly mistreated in secret prisons, run by an intelligence organization operating in secret. They actually argue that the secret operations of the CIA need to be tightly restricted because the bad publicity is so damaging to U.S. counterterrorism efforts. We can't have an intelligence agency using questionable methods in secret. Oh no, that undermines the very fabric of civilization. But airstrikes, the results of which can be seen on the news, well, they are no problem and should be continued.
Unfortunately, neither military nor intelligence operations can be conducted according to neat legalistic rules that make everything clean and tidy. If you increase restrictions & constraints, you hamper operations; you don't make them more effective. I'm not sure why these concepts are so difficult for some to grasp.