Praising God in West Virginia

In the wake of the Asian tsunami, we explored the intellectual quandary that suffering poses for those who believe in God.  In the wake of the awful turn of events in West Virginia, a slightly different question arises: to what extent should Christians attribute the mining accident to God, and how should that inform our response?  Here's an excerpt from the news coverage of the mining accident:

[A local resident] said the tragedy has shaken the faith of some in the community, who "don't even know if there is a Lord anymore," she said. "We had a miracle, and it was taken away from us."

John Casto was at a church where families had gathered when the false report arrived, and later when the terrible news was announced. After the first report, "they were praising God," he said. After the second, "they were cursing."

Let me make clear that I would likely have shared the reactions of the family members, praising God at the seeming miracle, cursing as it was snatched away.  But nevertheless the sequence makes me wince: if God is responsible for the miners' rescue, is God not also responsible for their deaths?  And if God is responsible for both, should not Christians praise God for his sovereignty regardless of the outcome?  But if the miners' deaths flow from the fallen state of the world and were not specifically brought about by God's design, does God deserve praise when rescuers' heroics overcome nature's operation?

It seems that there are three potential responses in this context: praising God for his sovereignty regardless of whether the miners happen to be rescued, leaving to the realm of mystery whether God intervened in the created (and fallen) order in any particular context; attributing the fate of the miners to human and natural forces and leaving God out of the equation; or praising God when the results comport with our understanding of how God should exercise his sovereignty and cursing when the results conflict with that understanding, implicitly assuming that the preferred results are evidence of God's specific intervention.

My inclination is that the first option most clearly reflects humanity's relationship with God (though I can't claim to have successfully followed it in the midst of my own suffering), as beautifully expressed by the classic hymn:

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
when sorrows like sea billows roll;
whatever my lot, thou hast taught me to say,
It is well, it is well with my soul. 

Note that this sentiment does not preclude us from working to alleviate suffering, but simply establishes God's sovereignty in the midst of that suffering.  Other thoughts?

Rob