DV, your inflammatory opinion that it was, "perhaps pride that got in the way" is what is finger-wagging clap trap.
Anything people do to make things better is great, but don't guess at motives or pride causing such things when you clearly don't have the evidence to back up such claims. It ruins your otherwise noble intentions.
Chugalug, you are splitting hairs chap. Trying to be better is reality. Being the best is, well, frankly, not. I'd argue no death is necessary. There are duties of care in war and in peacetime. We train as we fight, but it does not absolve us to be as safe as we can. That's the point of "the nature of military flying" comment - to be better at our jobs we subject ourselves to risks that are, where possible, bounded. Goal posts shift with time and as lessons are learned about what we do. To discuss hindsight is valuable only if lessons are learned. To use it as an "I told you so" isn't.
Both aircraft were at low level; a tactic fundamentally designed to defeat radar, which is exactly the things you are arguing weren't used effectively - probably because they wouldn't have been. I don't know your background but I suspect only a few here have much experience at 100-250ft and 8 miles per minute.