Leaders are always going to get people killed because of their decisions, that's why I think we don't need them, they also tend to be the ones who are expected to take the blame for everything too.
As long as there are people then there will be people killing other people.
The job of leaders of state, as concerns the topic of killing, is to minimize the number of people from their country that are killed by people from other countries.
It is the nature of human kind that some people like to be in control of other people AND that some people are happy to let someone else do the heavy lifting of making the world go round. So if the world ever evolves/descends to a state of statelessness (no borders) AND there are any people still in existence then I am afraid we will still have leaders of some type. And one of the jobs of those leaders will be to minimize the number of their constituents that are killed by the constituents of other leaders. Part of that will entail killing people under those other leaders.
Drones in the air without boots on the ground and clear military objectives is tactically the identical problem Nixon made with B52s....
Offering opinions about "killing people" without the other factors listed is implicitly an acceptance of the problem, rather than it's use as a solution.
EG, political killing can never, ever succeed, while military operations certainly can. Incidentally, some of the drones are operated by the CIA.
