In a speech, he is suggesting that the extensive use of remotely controlled vehicles in the pursuit of war creates a sanitized war that could become immoral:

Admiral Edouard Guillaud, the French armed forces chief of staff, warned his distinguished audience at the Summer Defense University on September 14 that “there needs to be a fundamental reflection on the idea that there can be zero deaths in war.” Speaking in measured tones Guillaud, who could easily pass for a brilliant university professor, questioned the increasing use of armed unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) in Afghanistan. “War becomes banal when the aggressor runs no risks,” he said adding that “the growth in technology must slow down because man must be able to master it.” He stressed that this issue of man mastering technology or allowing himself to become a slave to it “is a real question.” He said “this is an ethical question which will eventually lead to some form of legislation.”

It does sound a lot like:

“Death… destruction, disease, horror, that’s what war is all about. That’s what makes it a thing to be avoided. You’ve made it neat and painless. So neat and painless, you’ve had no reason to stop it. And you’ve had it for over five hundred years. Since it seems to be the only way I can save my crew, and my ship, I’m going to end it for you. One way, or another.”

Obviously, it’s not immoral to make war in a manner that minimizes casualties, but it’s equally obvious that if the technology results in making war that one would not otherwise make, then there needs to be some real discussion of the what the idea of remote control war, run by remote control, makes war too much of a throw away decision.