You are overestimating human capabilities. Humans are good at making complex decisions slowly. Machines can make lots of simple decisions very quickly. The best way to operate is to put both together. You can either put the human in the machine (pilots) or program the machine to make make human-like decisions based on preset criteria. When operating at exceptionally high speeds with a lot going on, humans struggle. Here, I think you are reliant on AI to complete the task.How many times have we heard that expression ? And yet we end up having to design new aircraft as we still can't duplicate the ability of the pilot.
And you are seriously over estimating the capability of current AI and it's not going to get much better soon. The issue isn't really the physical but the software. AI's have to be taught and that is both a slow process and currently flawed. We can teach something relatively simple, like chess to an AI. Something as complex as the 4D movement of a system over ground, trying to use a variety of sensor sources to identify a target on the ground that can not be seen clearly whilst determining if the target is valid and can be attacked, whilst avoiding hitting the ground and dodging potential enemy action. That is currently beyond us and will be for some time as we have to learn how we do it first. How can a human pilot, controlling an aircraft over the ground identify a target and decide if it's valid or not, if they can attack it or not and how ?
Putting a pilot in there makes you slow, unmanoeuverable, expensive and inexpendable. Missles are fast, cheap and can be used in high risk situations.
We have self driving cars. Driving a car is a lot more complex than flying a plane. There is nothing to hit in the sky, it's hard to hit other planes and the sky is always almost the same. Why are we so selective with pilots? Because we can be. Remember, we had auto-pilot a long time before we had self driving cars.