One thing that I am very pleased with this thread was the few, if any, posts from untrained and uneducated individuals making irrelevant comments. Not that my opinion makes any difference, because it is just that.
I would say when we go with a new pistol, it chamber a round larger than that of 9mm. By no means am I a proponent for this caliber and in my opinion the only positives it has is a large magazine capacity and is easy to shoot. I and I know many others would prefer to see a pistol chambered for the .40S&W or even better the .45ACP. A soldier using a pistol will very rarely, if ever, engage a target past 20 metres. Therefore, when talking about the range of a weapon system using the 5.7mm round is irrelevant, and the mass of the round is simply too small. I'm not going to get into terminal ballistics, because it was brifly discussed in the springfield xd thread.
I like what A_Majoor said "pistols if neccessary, but not neccessarily pistol." I believe it goes hand-in-hand with what KevinB said about the transition between primimary and seconday weapons. I believe the latter is especially true when operating in urban/CQB environments. There is a reason why SF and tactical police units are trained the transition. It works and it will save ones life. It is much faster to employ the transition that conduct your IA drills with your primary weapon in a high threat, high stress environment. Once a room has been cleared or a hostile situation been taken control of, one can revert back to their primary weapon conducts thier IA's and continue with the their operation.
This bring up another issue, the holster. I was glad to see it was too addressed. I am inclined to agree with Morpheus32 and believe that the modern infantry soldier does not require a triple retention holster. I do believe they require some type of retention holster just not one with all the bells and whistles. When is time of need, there are just more safety measures to keep you from retrieving your weapon. A friend of mine who went down to the States recently told me that these types of holsters can do more harm than good. He attended a combatives seminar while there and witnessed that in a high stress environments some cops had difficulty unholstering their weapons. He went on to say some couldn't draw their pistol because of the position they were in, kneeling laying on their backs. I say, what good is a holster if you can't draw the weapon out of it. This wasn't the case with all the holsters, but a few. A lot of us have watched the 'worlds most dangerous police encounters' shows. Have you guys ever seen how long it takes some of those officers to draw their weapons..... If you watch carefully, they sometimes take 3 or 4 attempts at drawing until successful. Trying to keep moving, keep an eye on the threat, while unsnapping, twisting and pushing or pulling on the pistol seems like to many variables to contend with. With training, this can be overcome, but from my own experience and the experience of others if that there enough training with these weapons and holsters. I would much rather see/be issued a Blackhawk CQB holster, almost the best of both worlds, even it would accompany a pistol with a light attached, it would be perfect in my view.
Thanks to those who are still with me at the end of this post, your time, patience and interest is appreciated. Enough for now......
