You either know what you are doing, or you don't. The actions of any person attempting a rescue should be entirely rational, that includes the initial decision to go. It requires that man know his abilities and limitaitons and make a rational decision based on his observaiton and assessment of the situation.
There is no requirment that any man lose his life to attempt a rescue. That means if after observation and assessment, the conclusion is that the rescue will not succeed, the rescue attempt should not be made. If someone else decides otherwise, on a voluntary basis, he can do so. If that someone else basis their decision on the same rational platform as the other(s) did, that's fine. If they base their acitons on feelings thay will fail.
"They are able to see right through all that smoke and haze and save lives in the process."
Seeing is either blind observation, which results in en emotional state that drives action. Or else it's a rational process, as described above. Emotionally driven action is for the most part fruitless and has no purpose other than to act on feelings.
As I pointed out earlier, your logic is sound.
To walk past a dying man on the way UP, however, raises a lot of questions for me. Kind of like finishing a game with the oppositions man lying dying on the court.
It would be very different if it had occured on the way down.
Not that it matters, but I hope this dogs those guys for a long time.