Sure. The point one author was making in a radio interview I was listening to the other day though was that the generals weren't really being held to account for their performance. And that is a very real problem in the US service, even if it is not in the British service.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Generals-American-Military-Command/dp/1594204047
http://www.npr.org/2012/10/29/163185980/should-the-generals-get-fired-more-often
Now while this applies to warfare, it also applies to everything generals (and admirals, let's not leave them out) do. As an example, there is a law on the books in the US that the commanding officers of a military posting are responsible to have the financial books of that command straightened out and balanced. They should be accounting audit ready. Well they are not. None of them.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Generals-American-Military-Command/dp/1594204047
http://www.npr.org/2012/10/29/163185980/should-the-generals-get-fired-more-often
Now while this applies to warfare, it also applies to everything generals (and admirals, let's not leave them out) do. As an example, there is a law on the books in the US that the commanding officers of a military posting are responsible to have the financial books of that command straightened out and balanced. They should be accounting audit ready. Well they are not. None of them.