I don't recall reading in the story how many A-10Cs were salvaged and rendered into aluminum ingots just the nebulous "some". That is enough to make the story sensational without being specifically factual.
For example, condemnation of an airframe can result from class B and C mishaps which can render the airframe unflyable but not unusable. Some become maintenance trainers, some are relegated to the fire department as rescue and recovery trainers (check out you local base fire training pit), most eventually are sent to DMAFB for AMARG disposition.
Sure. I see exactly the point you make, I used to be involved in military aviation, so I understand the point you make.
I think the gist of the article is that there are entities in and out of the US Air Force that would prefer to see the bridges burned so there is no way back to it. I believe it is possible that it may be true, even if I don’t believe anyone has actually acted on it in this fashion.
If anyone HAS approved the destruction of the refurbished airframes without those caveats you mentioned, I believe that is not just wrong and wasteful, but harmful to our national security.
I do agree, though...a “few” is not defined, and may be intentionally so to increase the impact of the article. (FWIW, I can believe that many of the A-10A variants are probably eligible to be destroyed for a variety of reasons)