I won't attempt to address this show which I haven't seen, but in general, propaganda can function to normalize or justify the obscene.
Through presenting two sides of an issue, it gives the illusion of honesty or fairness. Even if that strike was represented as a complete mistake with no justification, it has normalized drone strikes simply by exposing them as a thing you witness in sympathy from the comfort of your sofa.
There was nothing normalizing about their depiction. Most of the aftermath is showing a father's response to his dead young child. If anything it reinforces how horrific drone strikes on civilians are.
But it also reinforces the idea that this, tragedy included, is the new normal.
Showing the desperation of the victims, might also reassure you of the fact that you care about them (while in reality things like these happen every day without you even reading it in the news).
Finally, when you register that the ugly sides are taken in consideration, as you just did:
> In the same episode, a drone strike kills tens of innocent people. If you think that is "propaganda", you obviously weren't paying any attention.
your trust in the rest of the details of the episode and the series is enhanced. While they could be totally random, you have no clue about that.
I think being wary of normalization is justified, but there should also be room for a realistic representation of the banality of evil. The people doing drone strikes are eating cake and going to their kids' soccer game and helping their neighbors after blowing up people. Pretending this isn't true would also be stereotyping.
Through presenting two sides of an issue, it gives the illusion of honesty or fairness. Even if that strike was represented as a complete mistake with no justification, it has normalized drone strikes simply by exposing them as a thing you witness in sympathy from the comfort of your sofa.