Well, I doubt this will win me any friends, however...
It is extremely unlikely I will get killed at work. There is a slim chance, but my workplace is not known to be too unsafe. Should I get killed at work, my family and friends will come to my funeral. The Prime Minister will not.
Yet, if I joined the army, and I was killed in my workplace, the Prime Minister will come to my funeral.
Isn't being in the army inherently dangerous? If the bastardisation doesn't get you, or a sexual assault, or being forced to exercise until you die, a sniper in Afghanistan may well get you.
"The brave soldier killed by a sniper in the service of his country".
No, he or she may be brave or perhaps a coward. Just because they died does not make them brave.
In service for their country? That is exactly what I do. I am in service for the people of Melbourne, Australia and people from all over the world. Mine is a paid job and so is the soldier's. I may not be fighting for Queen and country as a soldier may be, but is that what he or she thought upon joining the armed services?
I am fine with an armed service person's death being significantly reported as it is a measure of our foolishness being involved in foreign wars and the toll does need to be noted. But that the Prime Minister and or all sorts of official types see the need to attend every soldier's funeral seems overkill to me.
I suppose the way things are going in Afghanistan means my issue will sort itself out. There will be too many funerals for the PM to attend and still govern the country.
Partner's of police often think of the dreaded knock at the door, as partner's of soldiers fear the same. Yet it is less of a shock for them if the worst happened than if someone knocked at my door to tell my partner of my death in a workplace accident.
Did the west really think they could succeed in Afghanistan when the Soviet Union failed?