Point being: Yes, the A-10's are more a show of commitment than show of force. That said: /u/WorldLeader is more or less correct.
But the complexity doesn't end there:
Lockheed's development of new laser 'super turrets':
When fully integrated, such a concept would in effect create an active laser sphere-like shield around the aircraft.
Not to mention the US has 11 strike groups capable of inserting and supporting worldwide operations.
There is a reason defense reports are long and dry.
More on future tech here:
This does not include the Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) program, cybernetic 'battlesuits', or naval assets such as the DD(X) Zumwalt-Class and further programs. The below is only a list of three, out of several, programs:
UCLASS | Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike
Among the slated features include: direct energy weapons, laser shield defense systems, self-healing technologies, and greater speed/agility.
Requirements have yet to be set around the manned/unmanned question. Gen Mike Hostage (in charge of procurement and development) said, “If it’s a single button on a keyboard that makes all our adversaries fall to the ground, I’m okay with that.”
And you have to ask: if we know they've been testing these systems, in public, then what is going on in the 'black projects'? The SR-71 Blackbird and B-2 Spirit Bomber (to name just two) emerged complete, when needed, out of the dark. The same thing happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis when the US exposed its' ability to take reconnaissance photography over the isle without anyone knowing.
Articles:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-debates-future-fighter-requirement-402243/
http://defensetech.org/2011/09/20/boeings-sixth-gen-fighter/
http://news.usni.org/2014/08/28/navys-next-fighter-likely-feature-artificial-intelligence
