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 ...
(Oops - link over 73,000 reads)
destroying oil wells makes no sense whatsoever.....you merely destroy anyone and anything attempting to transport the oil from the well.....people, pipelines, trucks....whatever.
Assuming you are correct, why is it so important to remove Assad? His quest for nuclear weapons?
obama = isis
It’s more than a feeling. Obama is doing as little as politically possible in order to give ISIS time to defeat Assad.
He made a good point about hitting the empty trucks. No need to destroy oil fields if they can’t transport it.
Wait a minute. Wouldn’t interrupting the supply of hydrocarbons in any manner limit the supply of hydrocarbons on the market to produce dangerous greenhouse gases? It seems to me damaging wells or the production process and taking them out of production would be more beneficial to the environmental cause. I am certain there are things that could be done to take the wells off line without blowing them up and burning off the contents. Even if the contents burn off, is that much more polluting than drilling, hauling it to a facility for further transportation to a refinery that would distill it into a product to be hauled to a sale point to then be burned? I do not know. The real problem is that interrupting the supply would diminish ISIS’s funds and that we must seemingly fight a conflict without upsetting the bad guys.
The Skeptical Environmentalist is a really good read.
@post 18 - zerohedge has some pretty whacked out commenters, but Timmy makes an awful lot of sense there. One has to wonder..... My guess is the main reason for Assad to be removed is this administration (including Shrillary) called for it and let’s not forget how embarrassed the President must have been when Assad stepped all over his little red line.
In my humble estimation from the peanut gallery it appears this administration has pretty consistently backed the wrong horse in their Arab Spring at every opportunity. They (with some justification) tore Bush a new one for not having a plan after shock and awe and the occupation of Iraq, but then they quadrupled down on the policy by calling for the removal of relatively stable (albeit unattractive) leaders in the Middle East and ISIS was the result.
One must ask what the benefit has been for hundreds of thousands of people (Christians and more moderate Muslims) to have been brutally killed and/or displaced while this administration looked like cheerleaders for anarchy.
It’s pretty bad when the ‘formers’ are STILL telling LIES.
0dunga might have given HIS PEOPLE at that time that excuse, but he was LYING to them when he did.
Remember the $500 million 0dunga spent to train TWO Syrian 'rebels'? Who do you think that money was REALLY for? ISIS!!!!
So we let them crucify, behead and burn people alive, mow down people in Paris and Mali because we might do damage to the environment.
This is beyond parody.
Can we fast forwarded to January 2016, please?
Have they outdone “pass the bill to find out what’s in it” at this point?
The flow of oil from ISIS can easily be shut down without destroying the oil wells or harming the environment.
Simply shut down the oil tanker truck traffic across the border to Turkey.
When last I checked, there is delivery and return trip for each trip . The tanker trucks are empty on the return trip so they can be attacked and destroyed without spilling any oil.
I mean really, Obama has publicly gone on record saying CO2 emissions are a much more dangerous problem than ISIS.
If he attacked the ISIS oil tankers and shut down the flow of oil think of how much green house gas emissions would be prevented if Obama shut down the ISIS Black Market oil scam. If Obama is telling the truth and green house emissions are such a danger, he should be demanding that they the ISIS Black Market oil be shut down
But Obama is not doing that. so We can infer that Obama is not telling the truth about the dangers of Global Warming and that Obama wants the ISIS oil to flow because he wants to provide aid and comfort the ISIS
We can’t have messy wars. They’re just ssthavage!
I think I’ve suddenly figured out why Xero has been so squirrely about this oil truck business: Besides the cash cut the Turks are getting, the truck drivers must also be Turkish. Xero doesn’t want to PO the Turks at Erdogan. He wants another jihadi state to build an army sufficient to crush Israel. That means he needs Erdogan to stay in power.
“There is no good reason to snuff the wells.”
Sure there is. They are in ISIS hands and enriching them.
Cause you know oil is so much more destructive to the enviroment than all out war /sarcasm
If we get Rubio, we'll get $6 gasoline. Oh, and a lot more dead servicemen. For what?
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.