Probably a good thing. It'd spare him the embarrassment of having to spin it into a "self defence" argument like Cameron did recently. I also doubt Corbyn would have a "kill list" on the issue too, another good thing.
I have no issue with terrorist filth getting what's coming to them but it leaves me a little uneasy when the government can just decide to murder folk and then scream "self defence!!! national security!!!" and it's simply left at that.
Whilst i can understand those concerns, drones are likely to be the least of our problems should a future government be so inclined as to turn on the citizenry free of consequence. The tools (UAVs in this case) are out there and won't be going away, do we shy away from what productive use they might have for fear of humanity's weakness?
Like as not, the security services have felt it necessary to carry out such killings over the years, the difference here is that Cameron went public. Certainly we should attempt to institute some form of oversight, but to the extent to which its work can be made known to the average person on the street isn't going to satisfy all.
Cameron's previous effort to garner parliamentary support for Syrian intervention was rightly defeated, if the Government has learnt the lesson of that failure, any repeat must include a coherent strategy as opposed to a mere reaction to events. There was cross-party opposition back in 2013, and there will be so again if MPs suspect that this is being proposed on a whim as
@Shamwow's put it.