Not so fast. This is *exactly* like the Chicom plane crisis back in spring 2001. The wording is not accidental. "Sorry" is being used specifically so that it can be spun one way here (mere regret that something happened) and portrayed as an apology and acceptance of culpability elsewhere, especially after translation. It is a deliberate tactic to save face at home while capitulating to anti-American sentiment overseas. So while the President's wording is not intended to actually accept blame for what happened, it IS intended to be perceived that way by certain audiences.
If I am the CEO of a company, am I more 'responsible' for a crime committed within the company, than a random crime in the neighborhood near by? Am I more responsible to get to the bottom of it, make sure that justice is done, and root out the problem?
Not analogous. The President, as chief executive, has just as much responsibility to make sure that "justice is done" with regard to (federal) civilian crimes as he does to military ones. He's not *just* the Commander-in-Chief. If some entry-level puke at a regional EPA office rapes a co-worker on federal property, does Bush need to personally say how sorry he is that it happened, or assure the victim that justice will be done, or tell King Abdullah of Jordan about it? Of course not. There's already a justice system to deal with such crimes. Just like there is in the military.
You've drawn a whale of a conclusion considering that you have absolutely NO idea as to why it was done (unless, of course, you're a Presidential advisor or confidante). You're guessing based on your own ideology rather than taking it at face value.
And perhaps my analogy is not absolute (not that any is), but there is a parallel and you know it.
The CinC is directly over the military. He's their 'boss.' The army's justice system notwithstanding, he is at its head.