I'm with him all the way until he starts talking about making everything Strike. Effectively it's get there in rush and hope nobody serious turns up, which is fine and dandy right until that 'Oh shit' moment when the first Armata hoves over the hill. He's creating a French army and you can look at the liberation of Kuwait to work out who was the most use, us or them, in that conflict. He is also ignoring the severity of Russian action, we may have interests in the Middle East, which is where Strike is clearly meant to go and do something, but we don't have critical interests. If you're doing a safety assessment which is more important a likely accident in which you crack a couple of ribs or an unlikely accident in which you die. On the safety matrix that's a no brainer and I'd suggest it should be on the defence risk assessment as well. I'd say he isn't really being very radical as this seems to be the way the army is actually heading. He also completely fails to address the total pointlessness of light infantry and cavalry.
I'd suggest a 2 division army of 12 MBT armoured, 20 infantry [8 tracked 12 wheeled], about 130 AS90/MLRS, 4 armoured recce, 30+ attack helicopters. Then a slightly enlarged special forces group, 2 battalions, with helicopter mobility. Say 25,000 fighting men. Get ruthless with admin and a total army of 45-50K. If that doesn't add up then come down to one real division of 8 MBT plus 8 Warrior and halve the other support accordingly.