Fair comment.
It seems paradoxical to me complaints about senior officers (2* and above) not making a stand on behalf of their troops do not take into account that disclosure of the information necessary to do so could in itself be an own goal.
Take the RN for example. It's widely been reported that they are in crap order in terms of manning and fuel. Is this not sensitive military info? Might not a former foe who was defeated with large contribution from the RN decide that now was the time for a rematch?
If the Army has crap living conditions and poor morale, would that not encourage a foreign army that they may prevail?
Might it not be that the RAF having a fleet(s) of knackered old AT and no coherent funded plans to do anything about it gives encouragement to others?
It's a mighty fine line to tread, but that's part of what General/Air/Flag officers get paid for. At Lt Col level, you're expected to follow the OSA to the letter!