A-10 stories are always amazing and fun to read. But there is another side that maybe should be mentioned: Supposedly the argument against the A-10 is that (1

A-10 stories are always amazing and fun to read. But there is another side that maybe should be mentioned: Supposedly the argument against the A-10 is that (1) the most important weapon the A-10 has is no longer that amazing gun but one or more of just various missiles and (2) can use an F-16, maybe an F-15, likely an F-18, in time the F-35 to fire such missiles but do it at higher speeds and altitudes where the plane is not so vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire from the ground. Or, it's great that the A-10 can take so much punishment, but a claim is that it would be better still to fly higher and faster and get nearly no punishment at all. I'm sure the astounding advantages of the A-10 are well understood. So, if some people want to put the A-10 out to pasture, maybe there is a reason. I'm just repeating the story I heard and am no expert. But, to argue for the A-10 again, to destroy an ISIS truck with a 50 caliber machine gun in the back, want to use a ~$1 million missile or a few shots from that amazing A-10 gun?