My understanding is that the US drones are missile platforms. They launch their shit, then return to base; while the cheaper Iranian drones are kamikaze.

Yeah, that's the idea here, particularly when it comes to the kind of drones being integrated with next generation fighters. The big notion most 6th gen fighter projects are moving towards is turning the plane into a mobile command and control centre, and using drones as the weapon delivery systems. So if you're, for example, trying to shoot down an enemy fighter using a missile, instead of putting yourself in missile range to do it you send one of your drones forward and have it launch a missile. If your drone gets splashed in return, oh well. These aren't cheap drones that we're talking about, they're basically fighter planes in their own right, but most militaries would much rather replace a plane than replace a pilot. That's why ejector seats exist.

This actually does make a lot of sense as a concept. Basically every plane becomes a whole flight or even a small squadron. This drastically cuts down on the number of pilots you need to achieve the same effect in the air, and pilots are a really, really expensive and very limited resource.

The F-47 isn't really a counter to Shaheds. There are ways to counter Shaheds, and the US desperately needs to invest in them, but that's not really what their 6th Gen fighter program is about, any more than it's the purpose of GCAP or whatever madness Saab is cooking up. 6th Gen fighters are built to take out the Russian and Chinese air forces. When one F-47 can basically counter a dozen Migs, that gives you a huge advantage.