I'm British so call me ignorant but I'm wholly unaware of drones  having been used on US citizens on US soil...

Also here's a quick thought experiment. If someone managed to hijack a tank (it's happened before) which was on course to plough through a school/hospital/puppy & baby center, would it be a problem to call in drones to destroy said tank before people were killed/injured? As the armed forces is a branch of the government, what's the issue of using them on US soil? Frankly when riots were happening here in the UK a few years ago, many people would have liked to have seen the military on the streets guns blazing at the rioters. 

The issue isn't using our defence resources against people who are imminent threats. Hence, the issue isn't the use of drones themselves. Cops kill many criminals yearly, for example. The issue is the implementation of kill lists against non-combatants (which have existed for American citizens not in the U.S.) The reasons and justifications for killing these people are not revealed to the U.S public. The people are not subjected to due process of law before their extermination. Who is to say they are really terrorists if they did not have a trial? 

Put it this way - hellfire missles are not cheap. No one underserving of being blown up isn't going to be deliberately targeted. Also define "non-combatant". Are we talking about people who simply have say, skipped trial or people who are aiding enemies of the state?

When it's the taxpayer fitting the bill, they certainly don't care how expensive it is. As for a definition of non-combatant: somebody who is not harming other people or their property, directly. It's quite simple really. Unless there is a direct and immdediate threat to another's life, liberty, or property it isn't imminent. 

Al-Qaida tipsheet on avoiding drones found in Mali

Here's translated copy of the tipsheet in question, if you, people, are really want to follow the way of insurgency.

Then what about Osama? He never directly hurt anyone...Same with "banks" (people who fund enemies of the state and are 100% aware of this) and so on. If you have some guy on the Pakistan border who is aiding in the harm/deaths of US citizens knowingly and willingly, why should he be treated any differently to the man who pulls the trigger? Are you willing to put US lives in danger to simply give someone a life sentence? What's the point really?

Osama wasn't a U.S citizen, legal alien, or national living in the United States. At the same time, I think chasing him down was a huge waste of time and money, so I agree. 

Also by giving the executive branch the power to secretly kill Americans without due process of law is more dangerous to American lives AND liberty than any threat a supposed suspected terrorist might cause. No thank you. We have the fifth amendment for a reason. 

I agree that killing US citizens on US soil is abhorent, however if said US citizen is now living outside of the US and purposefully avoiding authorities, then I would say that it's better to take the shot while you can and potentially save lives then letting him go and potentially endanger your own citizens. I think what should be done in those instances is revoking citizenship however, and then blow them up, as long as they are not on US soil and are purposefully hiding in sympathetic states. The latter situation I think is why this heavy-handed approach is done. If someone was found in say Germany, I'm sure he would be extradited rather then have a hellfire missile rain down on some apartment in Berlin. 

Then what is your confusion? 

There is such a thing as treason, but that of course is something the courts must decide. If it is during a war, then that's a different situation entirely, of course. But I only agree if it is a legal war, which the United States does not do anymore (not since World War II.)

The issue there is what do you call terrorism? There are no countries directly involved, just people out to destroy a way of life/nation. Hunting & killing those people is expected on both sides.

Ultimately, no one on US soil will ever be killed if there is a good chance of safely aprehending the person. The notion that drones will start killing US citizens on US soil is ludicrous and in line with doomsday preppers as it goes against everything the country stands for; it's as likely as Obama announcing the US as a communist country.