I can't think of a more perfect example of a "Stretch-To-Fit"
operational doctrine than "From The Sea" Elm.
Here is the specious argument:
http://www.afa.org/magazine/1993/0193watch_print.html

At a recent session with defense reporters, Secretary of the Navy Sean
O'Keefe claimed that the Navy does not require the A/F-X to be "a
long-range interdiction aircraft" because deep interdiction missions
"are not the highest probability [for the service] in the years ahead."
Thus, he said, it makes sense that the A/F-X "evolved" from its A-X
beginnings as a straightforward replacement for the A-6E bomber to
become "an attack fighter aircraft, with primary focus on attack."
"We just don't need . . . this extraordinary 750-mile range" once
earmarked for the A-X, said Secretary O'Keefe, "because nobody's going
to be out there" for the plane to attack.

Subsequent events have proven the Honorable Mr. O'Keefe Absolutely
Wrong...

And as a postscript...ain't it interesting that it's an Air Force
publication that saw fit to preserve this...