COD military advisor defends MOH

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 23 August, 2010

Taliban are "hard little f***ers".

The retired soldier employed by Activision to ensure Call of Duty games are an authentic representation of real war has defended rival game Medal of Honor for allowing gamers to play as the Taliban in multiplayer.

Defence Secretary Liam Fox sparked a media storm when he demanded shops refuse to sell EA's upcoming Afghanistan shooter.

"I am disgusted and angry," he said. "It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product."

EA's already hit back at Fox, and the Government has distanced itself from his comments.

Now Hank Keirsey, a US military advisor with 24 years experience on the ground, has weighed in on the debate, accusing the media of inaccurately connecting the Taliban with Al-Qaeda.

"Those are hard little f***ers," Keirsey told Eurogamer.

"From a soldier perspective, I gotta admire certain qualities in those guys. They're not fighting for Al-Qaeda. Maybe one or two of them is. Most of them are fighting 'cos they've always fought.

"They've got what someone told them is a foreigner in town. They're gonna come down from the mountains with their little AKs and rally with other guys and try to beat the foreigner out of there.

"You gotta get into your enemy's mind set. There's courage on both sides."

"[The media is] making a connection that these are the guys that cut the heads off of women and kids in the night, then the next thing they do is climb into an aeroplane and fly into our buildings. That's not necessarily the case.

"Al-Qaeda did that. Yes, Taliban may be supporting those guys, because they're looking for some kind of ally and monetary support. But you have to understand your enemy.

"People are always looking at something to throw at the gaming industry – it's all cracked up bad."

In a statement issued today EA defended its game, describing it as "a highly authentic depiction of the soldier's experience in Afghanistan – matching US forces against the Taliban in today's war".

Keirsey, who worked on upcoming shooter Call of Duty: Black Ops, admitted Medal of Honor was "dicey", but said the game and others like it may lead to a greater respect from young people towards soldiers.

Keirsey referenced Operation Anaconda, a real life 2002 military endeavour in which Allied forces attempted to destroy Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces in the Shahi-Kot Valley. Medal of Honor references the conflict.

"Anaconda was a hell of a battle. I know the developer over there – we actually proposed that idea at one point. I remember that battle, so me and my other co-worker suggested it because it was a hell of a fight.

"That battle is over. Just like World War II is over. And there are all kinds of lessons to be learned from it, all kinds of elements of human courage... mistakes.

"If we can somehow replicate that fight and get some insight into it, I don't have a problem with it. No more than I have a problem with doing World War II or the Pacific. But I suppose somebody might."

Medal of Honor is due out on PS3, 360 and PC on 15th October.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (50) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • scottycam #1 2 years ago

    When you said this story would run and run I didn't think it would start by EG posting multiple news stories about it in the same day.

  • Grievous1976 #2 2 years ago

    Id say thats a very British Way of putting it lightly!

  • JahB #3 2 years ago

    to ensure Call of Duty games are an authentic representation of real war

    /is off to enlist to the snowmobile canyon jumping divsion

  • darkmorgado #4 2 years ago

    I don't have a problem with it. No more than I have a problem with doing World War II or the Pacific. But I suppose somebody might.

    Daily Mail readers say hi!

  • ignatiusjreilly #5 2 years ago

    I wish they didn't keep talking about authenticity, especially in this context. - I have never played the new MoH or been in any soldier vs. insurgent war, but I know for a fact that it is nothing, absolutely nothing, like Medal of Honor's team deathmatch.

  • DUFFKING #6 2 years ago

    I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe that the government have a man from the middle ages in charge of defence. I would urge gamers to show their support for the industry and tell this silly bastard to go and fuck himself.

  • darkmorgado #7 2 years ago

    1 story - 3 news items by 2pm

    And? There have been lots of different statements from different sides of the debate. It would be bad journalism if EG did a Daily Mail and only reported one side of the story.

  • ZizouFC #8 2 years ago

    I don't care!!!

  • glaeken #9 2 years ago

    That guy sounds like a tool. Why does he go on about a link between Al-Qaeda and the Taliban? What has that got to do with the story? He seems to have missed the point of what is even being commented on.

  • riceNpea #10 2 years ago

    Kiersey from COD Black Ops - ' Medal of Honor is "dicey" '

    is he taking the piss?

  • Bremenacht #11 2 years ago

    "You gotta get into your enemy's mind set. There's courage on both sides."

    Why the hell won't this game let me stone rape victims to death then?

  • Cronan #12 2 years ago

    Laim Fox's comment is the new "Kotick is a dick" story, we'll have off-shoots all week.

  • riceNpea #13 2 years ago

    @glaeken

    i would say YOU have completely missed the point. read it again

  • Mkwone #14 2 years ago

    I'm waiting for the next story where the taliban threaten EA with legal action over the fact they've not asked them for not asking permission to use the name Taliban.

  • TVoJ #15 2 years ago

    Hank makes a very good point about the Taliban not being Al-Queda so therefore not technically terrorists.
    Which got me to thinking why hasnt this happened with Counter-Strike?
    In CS you play either counter terrorists or TERRORISTS! Surely thats worse, epspeically on _de maps where the aim is to blow shit up, usually a public place.
    Fucking MP's.

  • darkmorgado #16 2 years ago

    Tip: to avoid you having to follow me around comments threads as your second career

    Yeah, because obviously I'm stalking you. Perhaps I just read the articles on this site, which you happen to comment on?

    Get over yourself chap.

  • Jay-ITFC #17 2 years ago

    @Mkwone Nah it's all good. EA bought the exclusive rights.

  • Boomerang #18 2 years ago

    I wonder if Taliban is a registered trademark yet?

    They could be making money for more AKs licensing the rights!

    "Taliban™: coming to a small village - and multiplayer shooter - near you this fall!"
    Edited by 1 at 23/08/10 @ 14:49

  • LR100 #19 2 years ago

    Is Liam Fox saying that all games that are 'un-british' should be banned? Games: Only buy british!

  • ignatiusjreilly #20 2 years ago

    (and our current defence minister) appear to have lugged them in the same boat.

    What did he say that makes you think he's unaware of the difference?

  • riceNpea #21 2 years ago

    @EarlBasset

    alternatively you could always put him on ignore. just a thought

  • M_of_the_sys #22 2 years ago

    @darkmorgado

    Do you ever sleep?

  • Byzanite #23 2 years ago

    @EarlBassett think you may be getting more than darkmorgado's ignore.
    idiot.

  • darkmorgado #24 2 years ago

    Do you ever sleep?

    Not really, I have a sleeping disorder that goes hand-in-hand with my Asperger's. Basically, I can never switch my brain off so consequently I can never sleep. I get maybe 2-3 hours a night, sometimes more on weekends if I've been heavy on the wine :-)

  • drxym #25 2 years ago

    If it's good enough for the US army, it should be good enough for Britain. America's Army allows you to play as insurgents. Which if you think about it is quite important when you're recruiting for an army to fight insurgents. Why should MOH be any different somehow? Perhaps COH should code an easter egg just for the knee jerk politicians. Instead of fighting as the taliban you should be able to fight as adorable kittens.

  • ParanoidZombie #26 2 years ago

    I just hope that the next stupid controversy will be about a game worth fighting for. Defending freedom of speech when it comes to such an opportunistic and tasteless piece of software is absolutely soul-draining.

  • SpaceMonkey77 #27 2 years ago

    Its nice to here from a former military man's view of this debacle. For a long time, the news media get away with a lot of crap, and this is worse if misinformed politicians step in.

    This is also a first, for a person working on a rival product, coming out in defence of both of them. Kudos to ya, COD military guy.

  • BuddyChrist #28 2 years ago

    Rabble rabble rabble!

    Prevention not cure. Ban anything short of world peace and we will no longer have these issues.

    Some douche company will always play on taboos. Next thing you know, we'll have Talibano snax, and Al Colaida. It's like when celebrities speak out their opinions.

    Toying with a real issue? Give the charity who support wounded soldiers some dosh.

    White collar Civvies chatting about being offended- screw em.
    Then they play the awareness card like they are doing a service, making games for Big money.

  • Billybob21 #29 2 years ago

    "People are always looking at something to throw at the gaming industry"

    QFT.

  • TheLittlestHobo #30 2 years ago

    Same old shitty modern journalism: sensationalist media headlines/articles goad reaction from often clueless MPs in order to get a quote to further bolster their original bullshit and give legs to the "hot topic" as people then have to come out and counter comment and so on.

  • Scimarad #31 2 years ago

    The closer shooters get to reality the less interested (and more uncomfortable) I get. Not that I think these games are especially realistic...

    Give me a good alien invasion game any day.

  • MightyMouse #32 2 years ago

    Same old shitty modern journalism: sensationalist media headlines/articles goad reaction from often clueless MPs in order to get a quote to further bolster their original bullshit and give legs to the "hot topic" as people then have to come out and counter comment and so on.

    The thing is, when it's the defence secretary you'd hope he wouldn't be clueless.

  • Darren #33 2 years ago

    It makes me laugh when I hear that military advisors are there to ensure that FPS such as the Call of Duty series "are an authentic representation of real war".

    No, they're not authentic at all as you certainly can't take cover for 10 seconds in reality and have all your wounds miraculously healed (wouldn't that be a great thing to have?). Nor do you get more than once chance at fighting if you're killed! And you certainly cannot adjust the difficulty if you find the going too easy or too hard! :p

    The Call of Duty series, like the Medal of Honor ones, are little more than glorified arcade games IMO and bear no real resemblance to what it would be like to take place in a real war at all. You only have to watch a documentary to know that. They're as realistic as your average Hollywood summer blockbuster, i.e. not very. ;)

  • darkmorgado #34 2 years ago

    The thing is, when it's the defence secretary you'd hope he wouldn't be clueless.

    True, but then he IS a Tory. It's not like they have a great history of having common sense. Even now, they've only been in power for a few months and already they are trying to privatise education through the backdoor, implementing policies that are going to have a huge negative effect on the lifelong disabled, diverting funds from the military to keep patching up an out of date nuclear weapons system, and scrapping tax breaks for the games industry at a time when they need them the most.

    It's like the last 13 years never happened.

  • waynenot #35 2 years ago

    "The retired SOLIDER employed by Activision "

    Is that the comparative of solid?

    You professional journalists, eh?

    Edited by 1 at 23/08/10 @ 18:00

  • Gromit #36 2 years ago

    @ darkmorgado

    Agree 100%.

    The last government weren't perfect, but they did a lot of good for this country, especially the less well off / able. People get bored and the media changes allegiances and then we get to where we are now. Those idiots campaigned for tax breaks, now they change their mind. Scum. Sad thing is that's going to be the least of this country's problems when they are done.

  • TravisTouchd0wn #37 2 years ago

    Just waiting for the Taliban Outfit for XBL Avatars. 320MSP. Probably 160MSP for an AK-47.

    What?

  • callum9999 #38 2 years ago

    @Argentlupine: He's the British defence secretary - of course hes going to think/say that. And while regrettable, the taliban is irrefutably the "bad side" so I would see the death of a taliban soldier as better than the death of a British soldier (not that either are okay I should add).

  • darkmorgado #39 2 years ago

    @Gromit

    Let's not forget the other stuff...

    Putting NHS budgets in the hands of GPs that have no budgetary experience (disaster waiting to happen), taking benefit entitlement away from addicts (soaring crime rate waiting to happen), combined with a 25% reduction in police budgets, increasing the distance you need to look for work (echoes of the whole 80s "on yer bike" thing), increased funding for Faith Schools (because we REALLY need more religious fundamentalists, don't we?). Then there's the whole thing about their "social" thinktank including serveral hardline homophobes informing government policy, and you start to wonder if the country has suddenly gone back in time 25 years.

    And as a Lib Dem voter, I'm ashamed that we let Clegg sell out our policies to jump into bed with these c*nts.
    Edited by 1 at 23/08/10 @ 22:14

  • Nephirion #40 2 years ago

    I hope there is a goat as an avatar award!!!

  • Immaterial #41 2 years ago

    Wake me up when silly season is over.

    Wonder how much all this publicity is going to do for the game's sales? Gibeaux must be one happy chappy.

  • darkmorgado #42 2 years ago

    To clarify on my point about the government implementing policies that will negatively affect people with lifelong disabilities:

    8/10 GPs have said that they do not know enough about Autism to help patients on the Autism Spectrum. These proposed Government DLA "tests" are so far looking at the purely physical disabled and yet will affect EVERYONE on DLA, despite the fact that only a small fraction of people on DLA have physical disabilities. So when we already live in a country where 85% of people with Autism receive insufficient support, and most people in the healthcare profession admit that they wouldn't recognise autism if it slapped them in the face, the Government is saying that everyone on DLA should have to undergo physical tests to ascertain their eligibility. Based on current estimates, we have between 500,000 to 1m people in this country with Autism. That means up to 800,000 will fall out of the system because of the new Tory policies. This is despite the legally-binding Autism Strategy which states that the government needs to do MORE, not less, to support us.
    Big society my fucking autistic arse. Big fucking cop out more like.
    Edited by 2 at 24/08/10 @ 01:49

  • darkmorgado #43 2 years ago

    Pre-emptive post:

    You do not grow out of Autism. Children with Autism become adults with Autism.

    Having Autism does not make you a "retard". A very small percentage of people with Autsim have below average intelligence. The rest of us rate higher than average.

    Autism is not a "cop out" diagnosis as many say. The increase in prevalence of ASD diagnoses is down to an increased understanding of the spectrum and greater research, not a PC movement,

    The MMR vaccine has NOTHING to do with Autism (the links are coincidental, as Autism symptoms start to present at between 2-3 years old, the same time as children tend to get their MMR).

    Autism has strong genetic links, with 90% of Autistic people being male, and a 90% chance of a parent with autism producing a child with autism. It seems to reside mainly along the male genes.

    People with Autism are not more likely to be criminals. Studies have shown we are more likely to be victims, not perpetratos.

    /spoken as someone on the spectrum, who works for the biggest psychiatric charity in the UK that has an increasing focus on ASD, who is sick and tired of receiving ignorant PMs and emails on the subject.
    Edited by 2 at 24/08/10 @ 02:29

  • bioreit #44 2 years ago

    I'd love to know what Liam Fox thinks is a definitively "British" game...

    Personally, I'd like to see him rail against this idea I'm forming right now:

    You play a British soldier in various British Imperial and post-Imperial conflicts (obviously not the same one every time), kind of like how Call of Duty hops you about between different nationalities, except this will be strictly British and strictly in linear fashion,

    I'm thinking the first conflict will be as a young recruit, just getting into an American port for the War of Independence, possibly with the protagonist getting their arse handed to them during them the Battles of Saratoga (1777). In between the two battles, you get to play a "Rape and Pillage" mini-game, because your ship lost all its rations during a storm while crossing the Atlantic. I'm thinking it will be standard QTE-style rhythm button-pressing. If successful in this mini-game, you get to burn down the homestead/farmhouse/barn where you performed these actions; if you fail, the farmer's wife/daughter/sister/slave/all of the above give(s) you syphilis. Dirty whore(s).

    The next chapter will start with you as the same soldier, older and more experienced now, obviously promoted to some kind of rank, in India in the very late 18th and early 19th Century. You will be working for the East India Company, effectively as a mercenary. You will help put down rebellions of pesky, ungrateful locals who do not think that their nation being ruled by a large company is a good idea. Towards the end of this section, you train a plucky youngster who seems wise beyond his years, a cheeky-chappy that you all know is going to die the instant you make any kind of emotional attachment with him. In the second of the two battles you fight with him, an artillery shell lands near you both. Except it's you that dies and now you play the plucky youngster. The end of the chapter is you on guard duty as a ship is loaded with opium bound for China. Last scene is some text explaining how admiring Hitler was of the strategic model used by the British in India.

    In this chapter you're a guard for opium shipments. It starts off with you on a ship, defending from Chinese pirates - this section will include hand-to-hand fighting on your ship, firing cannons at the pirates then swinging onto a pirate ship, killing everyone on board before setting light to it with pitch. A semi-boss moment will be a huge sumo-looking fucker (Japanese yes, but the pirates captured him. Or something) - it ends with you shoving the sharp end of the torch holder through him, then pushing him into the pitch, oil and rum mix on the deck. Then it fast-forwards to the Opium Wars, where China decides that actually, it doesn't want all it's citizens doped out on this illegal drug, so destroys a shipment - then Lord Palmerston orders war in order to gain compensation. Cue lots of killing civilians and soldiers alike, followed by scenes of distributing opium to the masses.

    Last chapter is in South Africa, for the Boer Wars. Fairly short chapter (as I'm running out of ideas), but basically it works like this: shoot unarmed civilian Afrikaners; shoot armed Afrikaners that come for revenge; initiate scorched earth policy on all civilian land-holdings because British Army tactics can't cope with guerilla warfare; round up Afrikaner woman and children and place in concentration camps. End chapter with some reference to where Hitler got the idea for his camps from.

    Bonus Level: Flying an RAF jet over Afghanistan and Iraq, dropping bombs. Hitting genuine military targets gives you points; hit more in a row and get a multiplier. Kill innocent civilians instead and you lose your multiplier.

    There you go Liam - a 100% British game that would be 100% accurate (with obviously some license due to it being a game). Let's see him have a problem with that then.

  • paulf #45 2 years ago

    the fox took the bait

  • Gromit #46 2 years ago

    @ Cragtek

    How were those STATEMENTS OF FACT taken out of context?

    They weren't put in a different context, it was tellin it like it is. If you are a Tory apologist, please explain them away if you can, because the people who made up the policies obviously can't defend them. I too would be p***ed off if I had voted Lib Dem, the sad thing is though, until Labour get a credible leader we can't get them out unless they implode.

  • darkmorgado #47 2 years ago

    You can thank the party you so vividly post for, for the crushing crisis England is in now as well ;)

    I don't vote Labour :-)

  • darkmorgado #48 2 years ago

    Dark's comedy link between faith schools and religious extremism was a glimpse of the kind of total naivity going on here.

    Yeah, because the kids that go to Faith schools really end up with a balanced outlook on life, don't they?
    Speaking as someone who has seen the damage that Faith schools do first hand (and without going into the studies that support my view), the only one here that is being naive is you.

  • darkmorgado #49 2 years ago

    I'm not an apologist in any way shape or form, I just don't understand what your possible opposition could be to spending cuts?

    I'm not opposed to spending cuts at all, and I fully understand and support that cuts in areas are necessary. But no thought whatsoever has been put into the cuts being proposed because the Tories are so desperate to cut fast, hard and deep. As mentioned, cutting benefits for addicts will result in them committing crime to get their fix, which will then compound with a police force understaffed and underequipped due to a massive 25% budget cut.

    Putting the NHS budget in the hands of GPs will lead to hundreds of people with no budgetary experience suddenly running budgets. As someone who has worked in the NHS and seen this firsthand, then frankly I worry for the future of the NHS because I can guarantee that it will lead to massive overspend, which will then allow the Tories to justify privatisation - which they are already talking about.

    And then we get an increase in funding to faith schools, which studies have shown provide a poorer education, suffer from endemic bullying and put out maladjusted teens. This is while the Tories have cut mainstream school spending across the board for schools that are already struggling, telling them to open their own schools (hello again, privatisation!), something which has again been proven to lead to WORSE EDUCATION in other countries that have already experimented with it.

    And again, as mentioned, their plans for DLA will have a huge negative effect on thousands of people who rely on it. Do you actually know how many people were convicted of benefit fraud in the last few years? Less than a dozen. Do you know how much that fraud was worth? A couple of thousand pounds. This is a case of the Tories fucking around in an area they know nothing about, and not caring who they hurt in the process, because they are so blinkered that they just consider every single person receiving benefits to be a scrounger. Not to mention that they are having this whole process run by a... yes, that's right! PRIVATE COMPANY.

    The Tory answer to budget spending is just to fucking privatise everything. It always has been. Take government responsibility away and you can't blame them for anything.

    EDIT: The fact that you just negged me but were unable to actually form a coherent argument against these points justs goes to show that you have no clue what you're talking about when you try to defend this shit. Next time, learn your subject before talking shit. And check to see if you're going up against someone who is involved in politics as well, especially before you mistakenly call them a Labour voter.
    Edited by 2 at 24/08/10 @ 12:27

  • Talbot #50 2 years ago

    Never played CoD/MoH for the Multiplayer, it has always sucked as far as I'm concerned. I play it for the cheap stoned Sunday afternoon play through of the single player campaign. Bit of a tradition going back to the first CoD.

    Why they need a military advisor I'll never know and how that military advisor advises for a stupidly unrealistic video game without holding his 'manhood cheap' is even more extraordinary.