On the performance of the Soviet/Chinese model ...I agree with what you said: had we faced the Soviets in a limited air-war prior to GW1, we would still have won ...just had more casualties than against the Iraqis. No argument there. To be quite straight I believe that the First Gulf War was an immense educational lesson for the Russians, the Chinese, and other upper-tier nations (like India) that had adhered to the central-command Soviet model. Those lessons can easily be seen in the way those forces have oriented their current military. Actually even in the Yugoslavia NATO action, one could notice some of those lessons starting to form ....for instance how the Yugoslavs were quite innovative in using decoys, microwaves and other cheap but effective tactics (the report of over a hundred APCs and Tanks destroyed, as well as several bridges, turned out to be far less in reality). The Indian, Russian and Chinese militaries have been taking measures to ensure that the routing of Iraq does not apply to them.
As for the F-35 ...I am sure it will be a great plane. It is just that it has experienced significant role creep. It has gone from being a 'lo' aircraft to the Raptor's 'hi,' to being the mainstay of the USAF, USN, and Marines. That might be a problem should a conflagration rise against a near-peer adversary. Does that mean we would lose the war? No, however the adversary doesn't need to win the war. Simply by hitting a hard enough blow, and letting 50% of the US population (the 'other side' of whatever political party is currently in the WH ...if it's a Dem then the 50% will be Republican, if it is a Republican then the 50% will be DUmmies) plus the media, and suddenly words like 'debacle' and 'quagmire' start coming up. The F-35 with F-22s is a great team ...however 187 Raptors is quite less than what was originally planned (and unlike the SeaWolf-to-Virginia 'cost cutting' measures, which is quite similar to the Raptor in that the SWolf was supposed to have 29 hulls, that were cut to 12, then to 3 ...raising the costs so much that the Virginia was incepted to be a 'cheaper' alternative, which ended up costing the same ...unlike that, the F-35 is not as capable as the Raptor).
Anyways, as for the SUV analogy you came up with ...I think it is perfect. Far better than my Audi vs Murcielago analogy. The 35 is the perfect truck, able to do everything (and do it quite well for that matter). The issue comes when it is track day, and the competition is showing up with Dodge Vipers. Suddenly that Lamborghini starts to look mighty attractive. Sure, in most days all one needs is the truck ...and track days will be few and far between (hence the need for far more F-35s than F-22s).
However 187 is a tad too few.
bttt