But to give this Klingon an honorable scenario, he could be up against two or three enemies release the pets and they go off every-which way and attack the others as he fights the other one. Ok, so finally he is fighting honorable. But those are REALLY specific circumstances for this Klingon to be able to die well.
Not any more specific as the ones that make the use of a cloaking device honorable - and still it is considered a standard piece of equipment.
Glory is in the challenge. Regardless of the nature of the challenge.
Originally Posted by nileight
I argue that Martok, and other generals that have been featured on the various shows, are exceptions that lead from the front, like Patton. Most are in the rear with the gear.
Perhaps not that far removed from the front, but certainly not in the first line of attack, and they usually have the biggest and best protected ship of the fleet. Which is a necessity of combat, really. To recklessly throw away one's life in a futile attempt to attain personal glory which then results in the fleet getting beaten because it has no leader is actually considered unhonorable, because the General put his personal honor before the good of the Empire. Yes, Klingon thinking is complicated like that. And the same way of thinking would be applied to the use of animals.
Also, let's not forget biology. Klingons will get excited in combat. Any combat. I kinda expect bloody animal fights to be a popular event on Klingon worlds, and this kind of excitement would apply to sending these animals against one's enemies as well. It's all about whether it's still "a good fight". But really, this question can be applied just as much to the difference between bat'leth and disruptor rifle.
As for Martok, he was an exception in more than this way. Considering he came from a common origin, this likely influenced the way he led, being closer to his troops than other nobles. And so often being found amidst them - even in combat.