Just keep in mind that most of the critics of the F-35 are Americans, like this former Eagle and Viper USAF instructor in an interview:
Q: Will the F-35's sensor fusion and low observability (stealth) allow it to overcome its lackluster maneuverability and kinetic performance against future enemies?
A: I can't answer this one. I can ask, "Why did they make it such a pig?"
Q: If you had to fly any fighter into an air combat arena today, including an operational F-35A as an option, what would it be?
A: The F-22. It's a better jet than the F-35. It can carry at least as much, further and faster. If it was up to me I'd cancel the F-35 and start building more Raptors. A common counter to that is the cost to restart the F-22 assembly line. How much does one pig cost? Another is that the F-35 program is too far along. Yep, let's just keep paying for a poorly-managed, overly expensive fighter that has three versions that make any one version less than it could be. Can you say F-111? That the F-35's avionics are better than the F-22's; how about a Raptor upgrade? I'd also build more advanced versions of the F-15 and F-16.
Q: If you had a wish list of three things that you think the USAF fighter community needs more than anything else, and currently do not have, what would it be?
A: Number 1: AESA radar for the F-16. A force multiplier.
Number 2: Better offensive jamming and better defensive systems.
Number 3: More DACT (dissimilar air combat training—flying against different types of fighters than the one you fly). There are students who show up as Weapons School students who have never done a 4 versus 4 DACT mission. I was doing them as an F-15 student at Luke. I could write a short thesis on this subject.