James Joyner has the answer, and he's not pleased.

I've thought about this phenomenon before, especially when a subtle sense of shame occured to me as I watched some of the spectacular footage in the Grouchy Media Videos. It's almost as if it has been beaten into my skull that celebrating or being awed by the action of war is universally morally reprehensible.

The problem with this idea is the fact that there are thousands and thousands of tough, brave men and women who are efficiently doing their job by killing lots of people. They are using dangerous, fast equipment, dodging rocket-propelled grenades and unleashing bullets, cluster munitions, tank rounds and all manner of horrors in an effort to exterminate the enemy. The "killers" deserve to be celebrated, not just the "victims."

A Marine rifleman that charges into a palm grove outside Kut, firing all the way. The soldiers involved in the bleary-eyed eruption of a fierce, close-quarters firefight at Saddam International Airport at the break of dawn. A soldier nominated for the Medal of Honor for killing 20-50 Iraqis and dying in order to save 100 American soldiers.

Why isn't SFC Paul Smith a household name in addition to PFC Jessica Lynch?

The increasing civilization of our society and the rejection of violence is definitely something to embrace, but it also seems like we may be unnaturally shedding a vital part of the human character that allows us to compete with societies that do embrace violence. It's unfortunate, but we will always need a brave warrior-class that needs to be celebrated. It's a fine line between glorifying death and voicing appropriate admiration for the more violent exploits of the military, but it seems like the media doesn't even try to walk it any longer. Where are you Audie Murphy?