it weren't so sad... LINK.

Excerpts:
"The military is as concerned about the mission of additional troops as it is about the size of the force and is looking for Obama to resolve critical internal debates, including the relative merits of conducting conventional combat vs. targeted guerrilla war. With limited resources, should the military concentrate on eliminating a Taliban presence -- a task for which most think the United States and its allies will never have enough troops -- or on securing large population areas?"
. . .

"...The Army is already spending $1.1 billion to provide facilities for additional troops in Afghanistan and plans to start an additional $1.3 billion in construction next year. But it remains unclear what kinds of forces, with what assignments, will be sent..." (emphasis added / kw)
Well, one thing I've learned from watching the system for many years is that if the Armed Forces do not resolve internal debates, the Politicians will do that for them -- almost always to the disadvantage of said Forces...

I've also observed that generally if money is spent, that dictates what will occur. New construction just aches to be filled -- whether there's a purpose in the fill or not...

The final clause from the article:
"There is a deep-seated belief among Obama advisers that no matter how many pre-inauguration diplomatic, military and intelligence briefings they receive, they will not have a full picture of the depth of the problems in Afghanistan or the options for fixing them until Obama reaches the Oval Office."
Given the first two quotes, the conclusion of the Obama advisers, while regrettable, is understandable.

It would also appear that that the supposedly monolithic DoD and / or Army cannot provide a full picture to the Obama crew because they apparently do not have one themselves. I don't think that's funny but it is sad...