Well, there is a model for retaining them. Put simply, you create a new service which specializes in Small Wars. If you look at the historical evolution of the military in the West, we have tended to build our institutions around particular technologies of combat - e.g. infantry, cavalry, artillery, air, etc. Sometimes, mainly due to politics, a particular technology-oriented group becomes powerful enough to grab an institutional monopoly on some aspect of combat. Anytime when reality impinges on these institutional monopolies, we find them creating "special units" which are under their institutional control to handle reality.
The process of how this happens is, actually, quite simple and predictable. If anyone is interested, it was worked out by Andrew Abbott in his The System of the Professions - a truly brilliant work. While Abbott does not deal with the military, his analysis of the medical profession is a very good analog.
So, back to the retention question - create a service that owns an institutional monopoly on small wars with its own promotion ladders, etc. By basing a service on a task set or conflict type rather than on a technology, you can avoid the idiocies that come from an institution defending a clearly useless technology. Of course, given the current climate, I doubt that you would get much political support for this idea...
Marc
Bookmarks