President Barack Obama has long defended the administration’s use of targeted drone strikes. But a new, nonpartisan report says drones could be counterproductive.

Read background below from NPR:

U.S. strategy that relies on armed drones to kill terrorism suspects overseas "rests on questionable assumptions and risks increasing instability and escalating costs," according to a year-long study by a group of prominent military, intelligence and foreign policy experts.

The report, released early Thursday by the Stimson Center, concludes that while targeted killing operations might have protected Americans at home, they come at a heavy price abroad: Extremist groups have only grown in influence overseas and "blow back" over civilian casualties is becoming "a potent recruiting tool for terrorist organizations," in places like Yemen and Pakistan.

Shep: Gov't Can Use Drones to Kill, But Media Can't Use Them to Gather News?

Can the U.S. Legally Kill an American Terror Suspect Overseas?​

Former Obama administration official Rosa Brooks, who led the task force, was on “Fox and Friends” this morning to discuss the nation’s use of drones.

“You can kill as many people as you want, but you can’t kill your way one person at a time out of the problem of terrorism, it’s just too complicated,” Brooks said. “And I think the last couple of weeks have shown us that very, very clearly. People call this the whack-a-mole approach to counter-terrorism and it’s an overused phrase but it’s accurate. You know, bad guy pops up, you get him, bad guy pops up, you get him. You say, ‘Wow, we’re winning.’ The trouble is you’re sort of poking the hornet’s nest and each bad guy you kill is creating two or three more.”

Watch her full interview above.