To come back to the (lack of) discipline in the Grande Armee ...

I opine that military discipline (no more or less than order in civil society) is not monolithic.

The priority of armies is to win battles and campaigns; not to be kind to by-standers.

The quality of discipline on the battlefield is far more important than that of troops "in quarters".

Napoleon's dilemma with his "dishonest" marshals and generals was that they exhibited bravery on the battlefield and won battles. If he sacked them for their excesses otherwise, where were the new ones who were more honest and could get the same results on the battlefield.

I think that somehow there is a flaw in logic by building a construct leading to an either or conclusion such as: either Napoleon was collusive with his rapacious commanders or else he was stupid.