> A single F35 which could penetrate air defense and go into the country would be a real problem.

The difference here is an F-35 + precision weaponry + intelligence to locate high value targets.

It's always going to be cheaper / easier to use shorter-range munitions, which means the launch platform has to be higher / closer.

But without strategic intelligence (what high value targets exist, and what are they supporting?) and targeting intelligence (where are they right now, and where will they be?) neither of the other two capabilities are valuable.

Logistics and command inevitably trend towards centralization, because it's inefficient and expensive to decentralize everything (and at some point the tyranny of compounding logistics makes it impossible).

Where there is centralization, there's a high value target, and that's a job for the F-35 and exquisite standoff weapons.

Should forces be a mix of high-low? Of course! That's something the US realized in the 80s and is why we have the F-16! (still flying, being built, and exported!)