Totally agree chum,
Back in the early 80s when the fitness movement really took off, there was a focus put on what was called "total fitness", it was made up of several component's, Muscular strength, cardiovascular endurance, flexibility, and body composition, at that time, Arthur Jones was still the owner of Nautilus, and his then focus was more on research than selling Nautilus machines (he had made his fortune by then), he had assembled a team of experts in physiology in Florida to help him conduct his research.
One of the things that Jones set about to prove and did, is that you could improve all aspects of "total fitness" with a well designed strength training program.
A will formulated strength training program (like yours) will...
*Increase muscular strength and mass
*Improve bone density
*Improve cardiovascular function
*Makes us more injury resistant
*Improve joint mobility and flexibility
*Ramp up the metabolism
*Reduce blood pressure
*Relief lower back pain
*Help prevent loss of muscle as we get older
*Improve blood sugar metabolism
*Reduce stress levels
*Improve athletic performance
*help lower cholesterol
*Improve gastrointestinal transition time
*Reduce difficulty in preforming day-to-day tasks
When it comes to Aerobic or steady state activity, it'll do only some of those things, but mostly it will be counterproductive, as well as that, contrary to popular belief it isn't a good method for fat loss, one pound of fat can fuel the body for up to 10 hours of steady state activity, the most important contribution exercise makes to a fat loss program, is the maintenance of lean muscle tissue, strength training is the only reputable method of maintaining muscle mass.
Aerobic's of the other hand, can actually cause you to lose muscle. But, my main issue with steady state activity, is the damage / wear and tear element.