[dpatriarche]

> what exactly should be done with the program?

While the US is already committed to the F-35, discussion of the plane's shortcomings is important for NATO and other allies who haven't yet signed up to buy the plane (e.g. Canada). Maybe the plane will mature into an effective platform, or maybe it will never be anything more than an expensive turkey. Right now it seems like the right thing to do is hold off making a purchase.

[bobzibub]

I wonder how much the Trump administration's insistence that NATO allies spend the full 2% of GDP on defense is so that these planes are within budget?

For the US, I'd bet the primary utility of this plane is the health of the defense complex because it is probably the last traditional major fighter program. They'll switch to fleats of networked AI "manned" drones and that will be the real prize. (Prize because it means force projection without political risk.) But one require a healthy defence industry to make these significant investments. And one requires significant expertise in a workforce in place. But the technology probably isn't there for another ten or twenty years or so for complex/flexible missions.

[gaius]

Prize because it means force projection without political risk

This is clearly the way that things are going. Within our lifetimes the Western way of making war will be a fleet of drones endlessly circling above "enemy" territory, firing a Hellfire missile at anyone a Facebook-trained face recognition algorithm deems to be a threat.

By "enemy" I mean "the entire rest of the world" of course.