Your take on this is the same as mine. The NYT would like us to get overconfident, cut spending as "our lead is so great", continue integrating women into the combat forces "to double the pool we draw from" and in general, not pay attention to business. They would have us believe our weapons are so superior they can't be touched, ignoring the age of our platforms, the eventual vulnerability of ships to anti-ship missiles, etc.
We've got a fine military, but it hasn't been tested (and I hope it doesn't have to be) against anything but third or fourth rate countries. Do our chemical defenses work? We don't really know how well they do. We seemed awful worried about GPS jamming. Then there's the Kornet anti-tank missiles.... The list goes on. Anyone in first place doesn't stay there long if he doesn't look over his shoulder.
I will not feel comfortable until the United States has 20 super-carrier groups, 10,000 fighter jets, 30,000 tanks and an inventory of 500,000 smart bombs and cruise missiles. Also, we need to eliminate the nuclear capability of all nations that are not our staunchest allies. The only nations I feel comfortable having nuclear capability (besides the U.S.) are England, Israel, Australia, Japan and maybe, just maybe, India.