Dude you have to seriously learn about the avionics of the airframe before posting such stuff. Networked air space management is not a new concept. Here AN/APG-81 radar, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1NrFZddihQ&list=PLxYF2Xt6-JqGp-LHnQucGbtbQTBdsnFp2, http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/issue/feature/1145.html#.UdByPpyBrNU. Im sorry but I just cant go on with this.
I learned that in CGI the F-35 can beat anything. It is not the avionics OF the airframe - it's avionics IN the airframe. None of these systems require the F-35 airframe and can be installed in other planes.
How in heck does Iraqi air differ from air elsewhere in the world? Air is air.
The difference is the density of flying objects. When you have 300 miles of nothing ahead of you and something pops up on radar you can start lobbing BVR missiles at it like a trooper. If on the other hand you switch on the radar and find 100 aircrafts in 30x30 miles square, stacked from zero to 40,000 feet, not counting drones, other flying objects and EW interferences, then BVR is useless.
Israel is, and has been since Yom Kippur War, actually since 1949, the biggest recipient of American foreign military aid of any other country. There is no reason to get into politics cause that is simply fact. It is also simply fact that the stat of Israel would not even exist if not for American assistance. Again...fact!
Dont get over yourself. Israel got little to nothing from the US till 1967 (that's already after 3 wars) when USSR started to give full support to the arab countries. Like everywhere in the world, if the USSR backs one side, the US immediately backs the other. Till 1967 France, Britain and the Czech were Israel's major weapon suppliers. Israel fought all its wars without the involvement of a single US soldier and the only war in which American resupply during the fighting made any difference was in 1973 and even then it only served to shorten the war by allowing Israel to go on the offensive immediately after managing to halt the Syrian and Egyptian advance.
Let me explain to you a little how military aid works. The US armed forces often do not buy enough expensive equipment to justify their economic viability to the industry. The US government cannot simply give money to the industry or buy it at inflated costs, therefore it creates an additional demand by distributing "aid" which is like coupons to its allies. This virtual money can only be spent in the US, so in practice the US government is giving real money to its industries to manufacture more weapons than the US needs, which are sent abroad.
A common twist is that with this coupons the allies are sold used US equipment and the US forces are buying new equipment instead. This is because the US usually do not sell latest technology to its allies unless they can get it elsewhere. If another supplier pops up and want to compete with the US suppliers, the US gov will sell these weapons via aid coupons in order to block the competition. One such examples involving Israel is the "Lavi" fighter. The Lavi was supposed to be a cheap fighter-attacker, but the project got ambitions and ended up as a direct competitor to the F-16. Certain US industries have put a large pressure on US gov to pressure Israel to cancel the project. They finally suceeded to win the IAF top brass to their side with a large deal of latest model F-16s (first C/D blocks if I remember). Project cancelled, threat removed. Isaeli industry has since learned to concentrate on technologies that the US does not have. This is why the IAF is still buying drones, radars, short range A2A missiles, some avionics and ECM, locally. The US then tries as much as possible to prevent sales of these technologies to other counties till they catch up in development - and then sell it themselves.
Alternatively, new technologies are sold as part of a political deal. The classic example is that for years the US refused to sell Patriots SAMs to Israel. They were eventually sold as part of a deal to keep Israel from retaliating against Iraqi Scuds during the 1st Gulf war (which would have dismantled the US-arab coalition). Weapon sales are authorized to Egypt and Saudi Arabia when ever their cooperation or appeasement on other matters is needed.
How does this relate to the F-35? The F-35 could have allowed Israel to escape this pattern and get a brand new weapon platform without the complications described above. The IAF wanted a lot of custom modifications and the Israeli industries could develop new gizmo's especially for it, which means guaranteed sales to the IAF and potential sales to the other partners involved. There were recent rumors that the US is refusing some of the agreed modifications at the production level and forcing Israel to buy it with the american equipment on it, which infuriated some industry people.
