I agree on the courage part.
The thing about warriors is that bravery is conflated with death in battle, so it's easy enough to suggest that warriors are, in a way, suicidal when they risk death. That generally runs paradoxically to the notion that the best warriors are the ones that don't go into battle to die. So the question is - are soldiers courageous for being willing to die to allow others to live or are they courageous for fighting to live in a situation against odds?
The point here is that there is perspective to contend with more than any actual distinction. For a loved one, the idea that his or her family/friend gave up his life for the greater good makes it easier to cope with the idea that person is dead. There's a fine line when it comes to accepting death, one does not want to believe the loved one willing died and left everyone behind but does not want to believe that loved one got nothing in return for his or her death. So, we have the narrative that soldiers bravely risked death for others. But, from the soldier's perspective, it's quite the opposite. He or she understands that accepting any outcome other than survival ultimately leads to mistakes that impact not just him or her, but the entire unit. Even in the case where a mission is logically suicidal, the intent is always to maximize the soldier's ability to survive.