https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12040
• 39 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
• 12 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS); 1 Patriot air defense battery; other air defense systems; and 21 air surveillance radars;
• 31 Abrams tanks, 45 T-72B tanks and 186 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles;
• 300 M113 and 189 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers;
• 2,000+ Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
• 10,000+ Javelin and 90,000+ other anti-armor systems;
• Phoenix Ghost, Switchblade, and other UAS;
• 198 155 mm and 72 105 mm Howitzers and artillery;
• 227 mortar systems;
• Remote Anti-Armor Mine (RAAM) Systems;
• 9,000+ Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire- Guided (TOW) missiles;
• High-speed anti-radiation missiles (HARMs) and laser- guided rocket systems;
• 35,000+ grenade launchers and small arms;
• communications, radar, and intelligence equipment; and
• training, maintenance, and sustainment.
(What's NOT on that list? Aircraft. What's the US doctrine way of winning a war, such as OIF? Air power.)
Now I've got 2 persapectives here. There is "largest weapons cache and standing military in the history of humanity" from pyvpx and there is this rather smaller list from yourself. I'm inclined to go with your list - I don't think the US is in a position to deploy the largest weapons cache in the history of humanity.
The evidence we have is that the US is broke and only capable of bullying people with this rather less impressive list of ad-hoc assembled gear with no air support. Which is not nothing, but has observably failed to turn back the Russians. They don't have the industrial or financial foundations to project do-what-I-say strength overseas any more against larger economies like Russia.
It is pretty obvious they don't have that capability, or they'd have used it.
Edit: Do you think no aircraft because they'd have to use US trained pilots?