True, but the second answer in some respects seems more plausible.
People can naturally ask questions, as Lavelle brings up while she's preparing for the mission, but that doesn't mean necessarily that he would receive answers as a junior officer.
To me, the real problem isn't the question of Sito being brave or lacking responsibility, by any means; the problem is that the way her implied death is described, there's no way of knowing if she died bravely trying to complete the mission, or if she just had bad luck and got killed trying to do the escape part. It's the same issue I have with Tasha's death in "Skin of Evil." Armus kills her just because he can, in a manner befitting a nameless redshirt, and the fact that she's a major character doesn't give her death any more meaning. It's purely arbitrary because the script requires it to be.
I think that's one of the reasons why the episode works. People die in the line of duty every day, and it can be in the most unheroic way. So many heroes die to silence, instead of fanfare, and this show expresses that point.