I can see where you are coming from. Maybe this is because the "War on Terror" is not seen as a fundamental enough threat to the U.S. to require a "total" response. Where
the threat is seen as fundamental, then intellectual resources would be seen as a priority and brought in. In WW I, the UK had its greatest newspaper baron running its propaganda efforts and on his small team of writers was H.G. Wells.

The military should hire the best writers and journalists around to put across their side and develop realistic scenarios. Also-rans won't cut it.

It is a Catch-22 that you describe in this case of the military doing PR. I know that we "the public" don't get the truth from either the military or the press. You can only really get the truth when you are living it. That being said, I don't think the military should ever have a different role than doing as they are told. The politicians are the ones you should be castigating for not being able to explain what the objectives and plans are. I am not a supporter of the Iraq War, but I do support the efforts in Afghanistan. We need to keep these separate and do what we need to keep our country safe.