Medal of Honor game banned from U.S. military bases and why that might be strategically unsound

By | September 10, 2010, 6:59am PDT

Summary: It’s a game. Our troops know it’s a game.

Anyone who knows me knows how much I respect the skill, dedication, intelligence, and patriotism of our troops in uniform. Most American soldiers face life-threatening challenges on a daily basis and succeed in spite of the best (such as they are) efforts of the enemy.

That’s why it’s so disappointing to see the Army & Air Force Exchange Service ban the latest of the wildly popular Medal of Honor video game series from U.S. military bases.

This is both a political and human interest story.

It’s also wrong-headed, underestimates the drive of our soldiers, and takes away a possible training tool from our troops.

Most video games have both a single-player mission. This is the version of the game that tells the story and the player plays through on his or her own.

Most modern video games also have a multi-player system, where groups of players get online, trash-talk each other, and frag nOObs.

In the upcoming Medal of Honor, set in Afghanistan, the single-player missions have the player taking on the role of Americans against the Taliban. No problem there.

On the other hand, the multi-player game modes allow players to play as both Americans fragging Taliban and — and here’s where the virtual shiite hits the fan* — as Taliban fragging Americans.

This is where the whole thing started to go downhill.

According to the Air Force Times, this whole mess may have started because of a grieving mom:

Gold Star mother Karen Meredith told Fox News in an Aug. 14 interview that EA was “disrespectful” for basing a game on an ongoing war. Her son, Army 1st Lt. Kenneth M. Ballard, 26, was killed in a 2004 firefight in Iraq.

Before I go on, it’s important to pass condolences on to Ms. Meredith and thank her for her son’s service to the country.

But let’s be clear here. One of the things American troops fight for is freedom.

We’ve been at war in Afghanistan for a very long time — the longest of any war America’s ever been in — and one of the ways we can help give Americans back home even a small taste of what our troops experience is through modern media, like video games.

To block out the war we’ve been in since the days of the Nintendo GameCube would be to block out a massive chunk of contemporary American history.

Then the Brits got into the game. British Defence Secretary Liam Fox called the game the worst insult he could possibly think of. He called it “un-British”.

In any case, the concerns of parents and politicians eventually ganged up on Maj. Gen. Bruce Casella, the guy in charge of the Army & Air Force Exchange Service, and an edict was issued.

There would be no copies of Medal of Honor in base PXs. There would be no copies of Medal of Honor sent to troops via pre-order. And there would be no copies of Medal of Honor stocked in GameStops on base.

First, have you seen the stuff that is stocked in GameStop?

Do you know that there are characters running around shopping malls in drag, beheading zombie women and children with double-sided chain saws? This is the same store that stocks Barbie Horse Adventures. This is a store that stocks Fallout 3 (awesome game, by the way), that shows all of Washington D.C. completely destroyed?

Did Maj. General Casella not think these might have a psychological impact on our troops?

American media can be disturbing. We produce Real Housewives of NJ where, in a perfect world, there’d be nothing on television but always-new episodes of the very British Top Gear running on all channels, 24/7.

The thing is, American troops can take it. To single out one game like Medal of Honor and ban it because we’re afraid some real, actual soldiers might play little, fake, virtual made-up Taliban for a night or two is nothing short of ludicrous.

It also sends the wrong message to our troops. America is about choice and if our troops don’t want to play Medal of Honor in multi-player mode and don’t want to play the Taliban, they don’t have to. No one is forcing them to plunk down sixty bucks for the game.

Casella is also sending the message that our troops might be swayed or disturbed by some silly images on their game consoles. Do you know what they see, every day, for real? The idea that our troops can’t take the imagery or that we’re softening them up on the enemy through a video game is equally wrong-headed.

It’s a game. Our troops know it’s a game.

The only message Casella is sending is that he doesn’t have confidence in the men and women of America’s military to tell the difference between a video game avatar and the actual bad guys they face during their work day.

They can tell the difference.

Oh, and one more thing. Drilling and training is at the core of much of an individual trooper’s skill set. Drilling creates strong instincts so when the fur is flying, the natural, ingrained reactions that take over are the ones that have been drilled into each soldier.

In Medal of Honor, troops have the option of playing the enemy, playing against the enemy, and playing out game scenarios against the enemy. Taking away a simple, cheap training tool from our forces is unwise.

Man up, General. Your troops are far smarter, far stronger, and far more dedicated than it seems you give them credit for.

TalkBack below. This is bound to be another one where those of you outside the U.S. need to weigh in. You’re welcome to, but please identify your country of origin and be polite.

That goes for everyone. This could be a fascinating discussion as long as everyone’s cool.

*Actually, the Taliban aren’t Shiite, they’re Wahhabi, a Sunni sect. But “Wahhabi hitting the fan” wouldn’t have worked as well.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets.

Disclosure

David Gewirtz

At various times during his adult life, David has voted for both Democrats and Republicans, and has been disappointed by both. He is deeply disturbed by how partisanship has come before patriotism in America, which gives him the freedom to pick on both sides.

David is a frequent guest on TV and radio stations across America and can usually be heard or seen on-the-air at least once a week. He writes weekly commentary and analysis for CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 and has been interviewed by Fox News, CNN, various ABC and NBC affiliates, and Canada’s Global TV. He has been a featured guest on National Public Radio and has also been featured on Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty where his commentaries on technology, industry, and emerging nations have been broadcast into 46 countries (all in their own unique translations).

David is the executive director of U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, a nonprofit research and policy organization. He is the Cyberterrorism Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security and a special contributor to Frontline Security Magazine. He is a member of the FBI’s InfraGard program, the security partnership between the FBI and industry. David is also a member of the U.S. Naval Institute and the National Defense Industrial Association, the leading defense industry association promoting national security.

David is an advisory board member for the Technical Communications and Management Certificate program at the University of California, Berkeley extension. He is also a member of the instructional faculty at the University of California, Berkeley extension.

David’s “day job” is as publisher and editor-in-chief of ZATZ publishing, an online publisher of technical magazines. Other than than his ownership stake in Component Enterprises, Inc. (the parent company of ZATZ), David has no additional industry investments.

ZATZ has many advertisers who do, in part, provide for David’s lush income and extravagant lifestyle. Most of them are IBM and Lotus aftermarket suppliers, some of them make goodies for Microsoft Outlook, and a few make all sorts of strange mobile devices and add-on products. David has been a regular judge of the IBM Awards, but has no formal financial interest in or with IBM.

Because the ZATZ online magazines often review products, David and ZATZ are sent an overwhelming stream of unsolicited, silly, and often useless products to review. Because they’re such a pain to track and ship back, these products often wind up in a dumpster or fill up the corner of a large closet. Although David has no plans to review products in connection to his ZDNet blog, if he does do a product review, he will disclose any relationship completely in that posting.

Both through ZATZ and independently, David derives a small income through various advertising and sales relationships with Amazon.com and Google. These are minor relationships and they will not impede his willingness or ability to chastise either company should they deserve it.

David has many other business relationships, but none of them relate to anything he covers in his ZDNet blog. David does have a bit of the sales-guy bug and if he’s not doing a sales deal with someone at least once a month, he goes through withdrawal. He has a number of consulting clients, but none of them relate to anything he covers for ZDNet (and if they ever do, he will either disclose that fact, or decline to write about them).

Back in the 1980s, David held the unusual title of “Godfather” at Apple. He has written and published 40 incredibly simplistic applications for Apple’s iPhone.

Although David is forbidden to disclose the terms of his iPhone developer agreement, he isn’t drinking the Apple Kool Aid, will never be confused with a metrosexual, and feels free to mock Apple, and Apple users, any time the occasion permits, on alternate Tuesdays, or if he’s bored.

Biography

David Gewirtz

In addition to hosting the ZDNet Government and ZDNet DIY-IT blogs, CBS Interactive's Distinguished Lecturer David Gewirtz is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets, is one of America's foremost cyber-security experts, and is a top expert on saving and creating jobs. He is also director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute as well as the founder of ZATZ Publishing.

David is a member of FBI InfraGard, the Cyberwarfare Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, and has been a regular CNN contributor, and a guest commentator for the Nieman Watchdog of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. He is the author of Where Have All the Emails Gone?, the definitive study of email in the White House, as well as How To Save Jobs and The Flexible Enterprise, the classic book that served as a foundation for today's agile business movement.

Talkback Most Recent of 104 Talkback(s)

  • I agree
    I agree, especially since I know so many Iraq/Afghanistan veterans as I live near Ft. Hood. They know the difference and such a game could assist the "what if?" musings in their heads. It would be great to hear from any vets that see this.
    To other readers who may comment: This has NOTHING to do with the question of whether or not we should be in Afghanistan or anywhere else! Stay focused on the core question.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ebrown@...
    10th Sep 2010
  • Yes, they should think
    @ebrown@...

    Yes, it does. If games like this make troops 'think' more than the idiots in command who got us into this WAR OF LIES in Afghanistan want them to? THAT'S A GOOD THING!

    Might make them REFUSE (like they really should have) to deploy to a country that has not directly attacked us!

    Before people say it: Yes, I think that troops SHOULD in some circumstances REFUSE to deploy to a foreign country to fight.... actually, in every case where we are not part of a peacekeeping effort or that country has not attacked us directly or one of our allies directly...... REFUSAL!

    I was going to join the Armed Forces at one time, but when I put those HARSH questions to the person who was recruiting me in high school... I realized that our Armed Forces as they were are nothing more than mercenaries and hired killers.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Lerianis10
    12th Sep 2010
  • I think you mixed up your wars.
    @Lerianis10

    The Taliban took credit for 9/11. In what way was that not a direct attack specifically against a civilian target?

    Anyway, to the point, while I don't think that clicking a mouse helps in training for trigger pulling, I think the games, setup properly help train people to coordinate better. It's a training tool that shouldn't be arbitrarily denied our troops, and frankly makes more sense than company paintball outings.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    tkejlboom
    13th Sep 2010
  • RE: Medal of Honor game banned from U.S. military bases and why that might be strategically unsound
    I like this article, harvesting is also great, Thank you for sharing. replica tag heuer
    replica IWC Watches
    ZDNet Gravatar
    biasedfans
    13th Sep
  • RE: Medal of Honor game banned from U.S. military bases and why that might be strategically unsound
    Thanks for sharing. It gives a better sight of the subject. Looking forward to more useful information.

    louis vuitton shoulder bags
    top handle bag
    ZDNet Gravatar
    biasedfans
    13th Sep
  • The game need to tweeks
    You should be able to kill islamist terrorists in the most painfull way possible.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Mectron
    10th Sep 2010
  • To keep the game realistic
    @Mectron ... there should be a mode where US forces indiscriminantly murder Afghan civilians, and save body parts as mementos.
    Then there should be a mode where US generals lecture US civilians on the kinds of speech they may and may not engage in or else they're harming the troops.
    Then there should be a mode where Congress passes a 'supplemental appropriation' of a hundred billion dollars so it doesn't show up in an auditable budget. Then the player can siphon off a few hundred million for Hamid Karzai's Swiss bank accounts.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    HollywoodDog
    10th Sep 2010
  • Our soldiers saving body parts?
    @Mectron

    And you know this how, you fool? Are you commenting from Kabul right now, or are you just buying the MSM reports out there? Geez, people like you really need to get away from the keyboard.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    SAStarling
    10th Sep 2010
  • I get my news from the developed world; BBC
    @HollywoodDog ... but the body parts thing is alleged in the US military's charging documents. These soldiers face the death penalty.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    HollywoodDog
    10th Sep 2010
  • Please provide us some proof, HollywoodDog
    otherwise your claims are baseless, and would have to be logiclly viewed as falsehoods.
    plain
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Mister Spock
    10th Sep 2010
  • US military charging documents
    @HollywoodDog ... all charges and specifications against the US soldiers are here: http://cryptome.org/dodi/afhan-kill-thugs.zip

    The documents have been redacted by the military to block the names of the accusers. The names and actions of those charged are shown.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    HollywoodDog
    11th Sep 2010
  • RE: Medal of Honor game banned from U.S. military bases and why that might be strategically unsound
    Very interesting website, there are so many creative things
    watch replica uk
    replica watches uk
    ZDNet Gravatar
    biasedfans
    13th Sep
  • Sigh..
    More political correctness running amok creating chaos and ruining lives.

    Down with P.C.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    People
    10th Sep 2010
  • ZDNet Gravatar
    Mcleary316
    11th Sep 2010
  • Yup, exactly
    @People

    So this video game is dishonor to a fallen Soldier, but, putting a mosque at ground zero? That's OK?
    ZDNet Gravatar
    SonofaSailor
    11th Sep 2010

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources