Most of the countries the US is dealing with right now don't have any kind of modern air-defense network, or really even any air force. So US aviation can make use of the skies over the battlefield uncontested. A battle against an adversary who has those things (like Russia or China) would be different; the US would need to be able to seize control of the air, and hold it.
Small fighters would indeed play a key role in that process, because they would be the ones who would have to sweep the skies clean of enemy fighters so that other aircraft (bombers, transports, etc.) could travel through them safely. If the battle zone is inside the adversary's air defense network, that would mean they'd have to be able to survive traveling through that network as well.
I would bet money that within thirty years this mission will be entirely handed over to UAVs/drones, since they're cheaper to operate and actually have some advantages over manned fighters -- a drone can turn harder than a manned plane can, for instance, because it doesn't have to worry about the G-forces killing the pilot. But technology is not quite there yet today.
Small fighters would indeed play a key role in that process, because they would be the ones who would have to sweep the skies clean of enemy fighters so that other aircraft (bombers, transports, etc.) could travel through them safely. If the battle zone is inside the adversary's air defense network, that would mean they'd have to be able to survive traveling through that network as well.
I would bet money that within thirty years this mission will be entirely handed over to UAVs/drones, since they're cheaper to operate and actually have some advantages over manned fighters -- a drone can turn harder than a manned plane can, for instance, because it doesn't have to worry about the G-forces killing the pilot. But technology is not quite there yet today.