I have mixed feelings that share some of what you said.
On the military, it's complicated - people make a big sacrifice and often are admirable.
But there is an issue that I think most in the military don't take real moral responsibility for their actions, pretending if the government says to do it that makes it 'ok'.
I don't mean extremes like 'shoot those babies', but the basic morality of the violence.
As Smedley Butler mention, it can have agendas like 'muscle for business'.
I have more respect for the people who refuse service unless they're convinced it's justified - e.g. WWII - than for many who make great sacrifices serving.
But the people who do that usually are more naive, often young - hard to 'blame them'.
They're told by almost everyone how noble and patriotic it is to 'serve their country', and we expect them to not accept that at face value? Hardly.
Wars are filled with good men who kill one another for hidden agendas to serve a few powerful people in the name of 'defending your country'.
I agree with you that police are under-credited for the day to day service they provide while a lot of glory is saved for the military.
But having said that, the troops are often not given respect they deserve in many ways. After being seduced to join, they're used up for the missions of the day, and left often with hard to deal with experiences, and problems, and having a lot of re-adjusting to do.
The conditioning they're put through alone to overcome the hesitation to kill IMO can lead to harm that lasts a long time - and might be linked to impulse control difficulty.
In a perfect world we wouldn't need much military, and of course we need a certain amount and should very much appreciate a lot of that service.
But we could use a lot more people who choose not to join when the military is oversized and used for questionable violence.
Sadly all too many happily join on every side, from the US to Al Queda. All think they're 'serving their side'. All can point to violence by enemies to justify more violence.
Really, you can say a lot about nearly all military - don't Hitler's armies deserve praise?
Weren't they 'good men' who served in their nation's armed forces, weren't they brave like US soldiers, didn't they make a huge sacrifice like US soldiers, for their country?
We might say they should have refused to serve because their leader was wrong, but how many soldiers really make that call, how realistic is that?
Really, the issues come back to the leaders and the society and the system, each play a role in unjust war and basically every war has injustice in it.
There's no justification for war generally, but plenty of reasons they happen.
I think there's a good reason to deny some praise to soldiers, to remove the incentives for them to serve and the message that society totally backs every mission.
When the US started a war with Mexico, some cheered it for the usual reasons; others, such as the new Republican Party and Abraham Lincoln, opposed it strongly. Ulysses S. Grant fought in it - and later as President said it was 'the most unjust war ever waged by a stronger power on a weaker power.' What do we do to prevent such 'unjust wars'? I ask that, but many will defend the war because they like the result.
Perhaps they have a point, but then how do they condemn Hitler for WWII? Could he have created a 'new Europe' which people like them now defend as 'worth it'?
It's a tough issue, praise for the military, with much deserved in ways, and not in others.