LO, to expand,
Your statement was that all three were absolute; i.e.
Unfortunately none are in the least valid.
Sorry, beg to differ:
1 - Stealth. Nothing is impervious to detection of some sorts. We all know this. I can see an F-35 with my eyeball. It is band-dependant (a subject covered over and over again). It is often a system of systems. To unknowingly imply that you don't believe stealth to be "in the least valid" is disingenous and I refer you to Tourist's point that you have never flown F-35 and your knowledge is second hand; your assertion on stealth confirms these.
2 - Hobs etc. Nobody in their right mind would post classified weapon system capabilities on a public forum. I'll leave it at that but suffice to say your view is a very overly simplistic one and therefore you cannot state absolutely that it is, "in the least valid". There are some pretty mind-boggling capabilities out there right now.
3 - Maneuvrability. The only one of the three issues I agree with you on, and this has been thrashed out in the public media over and over again. Indeed, it is the dead horse that tends to get re-flogged when there's nothing else to moan about. Monsieur Sprey loves this one, but in a modern war the likelihood of needing high agility in a sustained turning fight is far, far less than it was in 1960-1990.
To qualify my earlier response I believe your assumptions in making the statement that none are, "in the least valid" is wrong. One of your three is partially correct, but not all three.