Sources used in this document:

The priorities of the Six Key Mission Areas 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report resonate with Casey's objectives, but are more specific in terms of how Casey's vision will be realized. In terms of supporting the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, it specifically notes that support is defined as organizing, training and equipping the forces for deployment in the two theaters, but shifting the balance of the focus to Afghanistan. Its plan for re-balancing notes the need to fully implement BRAC and rotational readiness as well as Casey's more generally-stated objectives such as balancing forces commitments. The objective of sustaining families is likewise similar to Casey's, but as well as improving the health of troops it also defines grievance support as critical.

The vaguest of the defined objectives, establishing an integrated management system merely resolves to establish enterprise information architecture and other generally-stated technological goals such as reforming requirements and the acquisition processes. Fostering leadership is defined in more concrete terms, such as developing specific timelines, broadening experience, and reducing backlog in terms of promoting leaders. However, the most specifically detailed of all of the requirements is creating a true 21st century Army, which involves pages of details of new weapons systems and bureaucratic reforms.

Casey's objectives are thus a scaffold, while the Six Key Mission Areas 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report attempts to map out how to achieve such objectives. Some areas are clearly more detailed than others in the defense review, but the focus is more upon general implementation than establishing the reasons for setting the objectives and defining the new philosophy behind the 21st century army.