[rbefly]

Hello Alex,
Hope you aren't offended by this, but I don't think anyone missed your point, it's pretty obvious.
Having Pentax promote a militaristic, possibly jingoistic or war-like theme, while certainly appealing to some, would surely be distasteful to just as many others. Creating a divisive and polarizing campaign is a sure path to loosing half your potential consumer base.
This in no way reflects upon the brave men and women who serve in our military or any other. I'm sure all loyal Americans appreciate and honor the sacrifices you make. In fact, an ad of still photos, showing photojournalists in active combat zones, was used by Nikon (and possibly others) during the Vietnam conflict, IIRC.
But it didn't show the soldiers wielding cameras, or shots that only the military could obtain. This creates an entirely different effect in the viewer's mind, as if the camera maker was advocating war and violence as an exciting photo op. And, by association, the countries involved were condoning it.
While you and I may understand that it's not true, it's the appearance of a truth, or at least a suggestion of a fact.
This is not a question of hawks versus doves, it's just bad marketing.
I hope you can see and appreciate the difference. From your perspective it's understandable why this seems useful for Pentax, but I highly doubt they (or any other camera maker) would want or need the controversy that would surely follow.
Again, no offense intended, but 'extreme' sports, outdoor recreation, travel and family events would be a much more useful campaign for the WR capabilities of Pentax gear. JMO, YMMV.
Ron