Whenever I read or hear about the success of the surge, I substitute the phrase bribes to the tribes. Those four little words make a world of difference, and they go back a long way — viz. “Protection Payments” made to Tribes in Ottoman Gaza (1519-1582) — but you don’t see them often enough in news accounts of the Iraq war.
Nor do you hear the President With His Head Up His Ass boasting about our bribes to the tribes. He brags instead, as he did the other day, about “the surge of forces.” Even a lengthy report that broke the news of the new Army operations manual on counterinsurgency, revised after the “hard-won lessons” of Afghanistan and Iraq, fails to mention bribery. It speaks instead about the importance of street patrols.
Maybe when the revised operations manual is made public later this month, we’ll see the inclusion of a new doctrinal tactic to formalize what has already happened: “Bring lotsa cash to buy off the enemy, especially in ten-million-dollar bricks.”
(Hmmm, thanks to Fred Kaplan at Slate, I see that the manual has already been posted in a huge pdf file by Secrecy News. Downloading the 314-page manual– it’s 28 MB — is guaranteed to freeze your browser for a while. But I managed, and a quick glance through the pages indicates that bribing insurgents is not mentioned anywhere.)
A weapons analyst I know can’t understand why “the press lays off all this stuff. It scrubs everything clean, sanitizes it, and presents it in the best possible light. If this were a Democratic president overseeing strategy, he would be ripped apart. We have a real scandal. It’s not Whitewater. It’s something at the highest level of national security.”
In fairness, I have to point out that it’s not as if bribes to the tribes have gone unnoticed. Not too long ago, the BBC reported, as did others, that the payoffs have made al-Qaeda’s Ayman al-Zawahiri very unhappy. (Scroll way down.) And they were mentioned in passing only yesterday by NYT reporter Alissa J. Rubin. She noted that groups paid by the American military “to fight Islamic extremists” in Iraq’s Anbar Province “have mostly seemed to be cooperating,” although recently “their behavior has been [um] problematic.”
Meaning, of course, that bribes notwithstanding they’d rather put their own interests ahead of ours and others’. Now ain’t that a surprise.


Recent Comments
william osborne on Assange: It’s U.S. Security State vs. First Amendment
From an AP report today entitled "Secret to Prism success: Even bigger data seizure": "Prism makes sense of the cacophony of...william osborne on More Than Just an Opinion, Osborne Has Information
Those interested in more information about ECHELON and its use for industrial espionage might like to see this article from...william osborne on My Re-Tweet: Edward Snowden’s Amazing Interview
Its telling that the expose and Interviews appeared in a foreign paper. We can no longer count on our...Kyle Gann on My Re-Tweet: Edward Snowden’s Amazing Interview
Wow. Thanks for directing us to that. What a great young guy (and couple of great guys). There are still...william osborne on‘Leaked’ Teaser Video
The famous video that Manning released of civilians including journalists being murdered is only the tiniest example of the war...n.o.mustill onSay Hello to Mary Beach, Please
...a cinch to see,by looking at the work,where the top billing should really go..sans doute!Jan Herman on Assange: It’s U.S. Security State vs. First Amendment
Right. You could see that beginning to happen around 2001 and even a bit earlier, when the usual media and...william osborne on Assange: It’s U.S. Security State vs. First Amendment
I remember how wild and anarchic the Internet was in the 90s, and the potential it had for fomenting protest...Jeff Beach onSay Hello to Mary Beach, Please
Equal billing would be better.Jan Herman on Unbuttoned: Samuel Beckett Meets William Osborne
Done. Thanks for the catch.