MGoH,

"the point is that the safety of his own men is not the primary consideration for a commanding officer, it is always seen as subordinate to trying to achieve the miltary objective."

Granted, in general, what you say above is correct.

"In this case the military objective should have been to capture Saddam's sons alive if at all possible."

Now, in this case, Kevin, those inside the building had been given the opportunity to surrender, they declined and opened fire wounding US personnel. At this point, that is when the commanding officer of those troops exercises his judgement (re: "if at all possible") and, now under fire, his primary concern becomes his responsibility for the safety of the men under his command.

It would, indeed, have been different if those surrounding the building had known for certain, at that time, that among those inside were the sons of Saddam Hussein. But they didn't, so the order defining the military objective as stated by yourself, could not have been given orders had been issued. If they had known for certain that Saddam's sons were inside that building, orders may well have been issued which stated the "objective is to capture Saddam's sons alive at all costs." - vastly different thing, because it removes a great deal of freedom of action from those in command of the troops assigned the task.