Here is another hypothetical situation, we buy 380 F-22s and train like WWIII is around the corner. 50 years go by, and the cost of maintaining a military capable of destroying other superpowers spending its time in third world countries where only 1% of the aircrafts potential is utilized begins to bring down our economy. Meanwhile, China’s growing economy becomes stronger than ours and then they can afford to produce 100s of 5th generation aircraft more than us.

As you hinted at in your post, the weakest part in our fleet is the tankers. Those are things we really need. Unlike the F-22, they can be fully utilized in nearly every mission. Having a limited number of ultra high end aircraft is nothing new to the military. We only have 59 F-117s, 20 B-2s, and 100 B-1Bs, but we manage just fine. Imagine if the supporters of the F-117, B-2, and B-1A got their way and we had to spend billions to support a huge stealth fleet when we are fighting nations without an air force? Aircraft have become so expensive now that we are gambling as to whether we will need them in the future. Major wars don’t come out of nowhere. There is always a steady period of increasing tension, and that is the time when we commit to building as many of the latest technology fighters we can.

We do disagree, but this is not a new debate. Whenever new military equipment is introduced there are always those that think it is a waste and some that think it is vital. B-1A and M1A1 come to mind each with completely different results.