Maybe I read it wrong but I didn't get the idea he was proposing x28 as the end all and be all so much as questioning the original reasons for abandoning .308
DINGDINGDING! We have a winner!
At least someone can read...
I already specified that I was playing Devil's Advocate here. I am not a big enough poodle shooter fan to actually propose we go any lower. But the logic is the same.
First you observe that most combat takes place well within the effective range of the currently issued cartridge and that modern infantry has to carry a lot of crap, so reducing weapon load is a good idea. Then you propose a compromise to a small, shorter range cartridge that is still likely to be effective at the majority of current engagement distances while providing both lighter weight and less recoil. Then you use a lot of fancy wordage that politicians are likely to be impressed by, even if they don't completely understand, to describe the construction and effects of the projectile and exaggerate its effectiveness, and awe them with some exploding watermelons, explaining that it will do the same thing to the human body. And with the right political connections, wha-lah! The 5.56 is now your standard infantry cartridge. O, did I say 5.56? I meant 5.7
The 5.7x28 is actually intended to fill roughly the same role as the M1 Carbine. It is my understanding that this rifle was never intended to be standard issue on a large scale either, but despite claims of it failing to penetrate thick Korean winter garb, most units seemed to find it effective enough, and liked its light weight. If my understanding of history is correct, the Carbine, originally intended primarily for officers and REMFs as an alternative to the 1911 Colt, then found its way into Armored Cav and Airborne troops, and then into the general populace. I could be wrong here, but again, the philosophy was similar to the creation and adoption of the 5.56--sacrifice range and power for weight and controllability under the pretense that the round will still be effective at commonly occuring engagement distances.
Acknowledging that the average engagement distance in Iraq is rumored to be under 100 yards, the 5.7 doesn't seem like much of a stretch. Especially since nobody is suggesting we give up the 7.62 and .50 BMG in the support roles.