JSFfan,
Are your remarks directed at me? If so, let me take you through it all slowly.
1st para, you can disregard, it's called jesting.
3rd para, you can disregard, it's called absurdity.
There are better jets to do long-range interception - aircraft that really are long-endurance and long-range that are designed for air-to-air with no compromises for other purposes. This does not diminish the effectiveness of JSF in other roles, it's simply not its prime function.
the systems and cockpits of today make that a perfectly viable single-seat role anyway - so it can be done by today's single seat a-a aircraft for the reasons you make in your statement "there is a lot of automation on the f-35". That's nothing new, there is a lot of automation in all modern cockpits. Again, an aswer to Dat.
Some of the other roles you mention could be done by either - single seat OR two-seat. But, look at my previous statement, so you probably don't need two-seat (answering part of Dat's question).
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter' - Already been discussed here and elsewhere at length. Don't worry yourself, it doesn't mean JSF isn't going to be good in its intended role.
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset to get in close and mix it in the battlespace... ...put JSF in an environment where it derives little protection from its stealth, whilst being disadvantaged by its other characteristics that have come about due to the compromises that stealth demands. - Another old argument. Dat asked about fast-FAC, my response: fine as long as it doesn't incolve getting in close where JSF is not optimised to operate.
As for
Originally Posted by JSFan
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
Surely that's old news. What is the relevance?