No, I don't think that's the answer. Men and women sign up for the armed forces knowing that death or injury is a possibility. And sometimes, sadly, that is the outcome.
It is without a doubt scandalous the cuts that have been made in the defence budget when troops are still deployed in Afghanistan - I don't think anyone would dispute that. But sometimes commanding officers have to make snap decisions about where to deploy troops. Do we really want them to be sitting around weighing up the potential litigation costs? And can any amount of the tax-payers' money really compensate a family for the loss of their son or daughter anyway? Personally, I find the idea of compensation like that a bit distasteful. Can you put a price on a human life?
The troops need to be brought home. It's as simple as that. Or else they need to be suitably equipped. Which, let's face it, is just not going to happen. I just don't think that money can ever pay for a loved one's life. Especially as that money would otherwise be going towards healthcare, education - or even, ironically, equipment for the armed forces.