Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ex-CIA Chief: Obama Refused Strikes on ISIS Oil Wells Fearing 'Environmental Damage'
Newsmax ^ | Saturday, 28 Nov 2015 11:15 PM

Posted on 11/29/2015 5:28:07 PM PST by Olog-hai

Former CIA Acting Director Mike Morell says the reason why the Obama administration wouldn't bomb and destroy ISIS oil wells was out of concern about "environmental damage."

Discussing President Barack Obama's thinking prior to the Nov. 13 ISIS attacks in Paris, Morell, who served as acting director twice while he was the agency's deputy director, tells interviewer Charlie Rose there's "now a sense of urgency that there wasn't before." ...

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Syria; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: climatechangehoax; daesh; envirowackos; globalwarminghoax; highcrimes; iraq; isil; isis; islamicstate; mikemorell; obama; obamamuslim; obamasoilbuddies; oilwells; rop; treason; trumpwasright
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

1 posted on 11/29/2015 5:28:08 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Maybe he said it was all about ‘environmental damage’ but one can’t help feeling that Obama doesn’t really want to attack ISIS aggressively.


2 posted on 11/29/2015 5:30:08 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

This revelation might make for some interesting breakout sessions at the Parisian Summit.


3 posted on 11/29/2015 5:30:09 PM PST by o_1_2_3__
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

If the Tea Party owned oil wells Obama wouldn’t worry about environmental damage.


4 posted on 11/29/2015 5:31:57 PM PST by pleasenotcalifornia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: o_1_2_3__

Good point.....


5 posted on 11/29/2015 5:32:54 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Mike Morrell authored the “YouTube video did it!”-talking points. He is a clean, polite criminal who, having retired from the CIA, now works at a very Clinton-affiliated think-tank, Beacon Global Strategies.

1. He could be trying smear Obama as a favor to Hillary, who is more or less his BOSS.

2. He could be obsfuscating about his time at CIA, trying to save them blame by putting it onto Obama.

2. Could be telling the truth, since the truth about the Obama Admin is often weird.

WHICH ONE?

I don’t know.


6 posted on 11/29/2015 5:33:46 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

No, the only “damage” feared was to the pocket-books of his friend Erdogan in Turkey, who is helping ISIS smuggle the stolen oil.


7 posted on 11/29/2015 5:36:27 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hammer

I agree:

He’s probably trying to use this treacherous excuse to cover up for a far more treacherous truth:

That ISIS is a partly or mostly Obama-created entity, and that he found them useful and simply didn’t want to bomb them.

The “air war” was simple artifice, with 80% of pilots returning with all their ordnance; “Yeah, we, uh...got this AIR WAR, and stuff...”

He knew that for folks to swallow the bait his substitute excuse had to be a bit stinky and outrageous in order to be plausible.

I’m leaning towards that.


8 posted on 11/29/2015 5:37:16 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

“Environmental damage”. I believe it. The party, the Democrat party is heavily indebted to their environmentalist membership. They can’t do anything without approval of that sector of the party membership.

Lots of money comes to the party from the environmentalists.


9 posted on 11/29/2015 5:44:38 PM PST by rockinqsranch ((Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will. They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Bullcrap.


10 posted on 11/29/2015 5:50:00 PM PST by RushIsMyTeddyBear (I'm fed up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
We know the real reason. You can't fool us. He is a mooslim and will “stand on their side” if push comes to shove. His concern for the environment is deep because the issue deflects our attention from all of the ills he has caused.

Obamacare, Clinton, Kerry and Iran, economy, National Debt, Racial tensions that he has caused, mistrust of the administration and its members, the fuel bill for Air Force !, Moochelle’s trips, the corrupt Justice Department, the video that caused Benghazi, his records that he sealed, the death of his mother in law, ad nauseum.

11 posted on 11/29/2015 5:51:21 PM PST by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
"During his retreat in the Gulf War in 1991, Saddam Hussein ordered a refinery in Kuwait to release between 6 and 8 million tons of oil into the Gulf, leaving it with the world's biggest case of marine oil pollution. In their 1992 Gulf report, Greenpeace claimed it to be an 'unprecedented disaster,'...This 'devastating blow wreaked on the environment will increase the impact on human life for a long time to come.' (By contrast the Exxon Valdez released 266,000 barrels of oil on March 24, 1989.)

"Despite the fact that the oil pollution in the Gulf was the most extensive the world had ever seen and cost many animals their lives, it did not become the long-term ecological catastrophe people had feared and expected."

Citation: The Skeptical Environmentalist, 1996, Bjorn Lomborg. Pages 191-92.

12 posted on 11/29/2015 5:55:17 PM PST by Fungi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

There is no good reason to snuff the wells.


13 posted on 11/29/2015 5:56:28 PM PST by Paladin2 (my non-desktop devices are no longer allowed to try to fix speling and punctuation, nor my gran-mah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

All these pricks come out talking AFTER they’ve retired. They all should have came out while working for Obama and resigned in protest.


14 posted on 11/29/2015 5:56:50 PM PST by VerySadAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
The book was published in 1998 and reprinted a few times thereafter.
15 posted on 11/29/2015 5:57:30 PM PST by Fungi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

16 posted on 11/29/2015 6:00:33 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

So the life of a, let’s say desert tortoise, was more important than the head of a Christian?


17 posted on 11/29/2015 6:01:03 PM PST by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; All

DISMANTLE C.I.A. Put this TREASONOUS POS in prison. Why? (I’ll let zero hedge poster TimmyB explain)

Right. Talking about why our government didn’t destroy oil fields, when the entire world is really asking why it didn’t destroy any of the oil trucks transporting the oil, is a red herring. And if our government actually gave two fucks about the environment in Syria, it could easily have bombed the empty oil trucks returning from Turkey to Syria to be refilled. Obviously, we didn’t want to defund ISIS.

How about someone in our government actually speaking the truth for once? Anyone with a couple dozen functioning brain cells already knows what’s really going on. U.S. policy has been to use Islamic terror groups to fight against Assad’s Syrian government. So we allow them to be armed and funded so they can fight Assad and his forces. This makes our supposed war against ISIS a complete charade.


18 posted on 11/29/2015 6:02:45 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

I think it may be a bit of a stretch to blame Obama for the ‘creation’ of ISIS.

On the other hand, his heart may not be entirely into its destruction.


19 posted on 11/29/2015 6:04:51 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Okay, I can sort of buy that. Might want to avoid creating burning gushers of black oil smoke that are visible from space like when the Iraqis blew up the wells back in the day.

But you don’t have blow up the wells to shut down ISIS’s oil business. You just have to destroy the trucks, which is easy and clean.

It is truly bizarre that we didn’t take out the trucks years ago. Maybe one of these years someone in the media will ask the question of why that is.


20 posted on 11/29/2015 6:05:20 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson