I’m not sure how serious your comment is but anyway…what you’re describing is a decades-long reorientation of military doctrine and procurement strategy. Getting a different multi-role fighter is already a huge expense with lots of ramifications but no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Edit: IMO, if you really wanted to alter air force strategy to deter the US, you should look to Sweden and Finland who have been facing an asymmetric threat for decades. Aquire the Gripen, train with the Swedes in how to run and operate a distributed air force of small independent units capable of generating and performing missions from random roads in the woods.