The Real Reason Obama Won’t Destroy ISIS Oil Wells

My question had been, as we watched video daily of ISIS convoys of troops moving on more of the middle east, was why not bomb the troop convoys?

D'Souza Media, 2015  "On Tuesday, in an interview with television talk show host Charlie Rose, former CIA director Mike Morrell revealed the decision making processes that were undertaken by the Obama administration while Morrell was serving as a chief adviser to the president. The revelations from the interview provides a clear picture of the reasons given for decisions made in the fight against ISIS.

Rose began his interview summarizing the latest relevant news, from the State Department’s global travel alert, the Russian plane shot down by Turkey, and President Obama’s meeting with President Hollande. Rose then asked Morrell, “Where do we stand after Paris?”
. . .
"Morrell told Rose that Obama’s concern for environmental hazards and damage to the environment were the perceived reasons why Obama did not allow oil wells to be bombed. Stating that he’s not in the situation room any longer but in reflection on Obama policies, Morrell said, “Prior to Paris…there seemed to have been a judgement that look we don’t want to destroy these oil tankers because that’s infrastructure that’s going to be necessary to support the people when ISIS isn’t there anymore and it’s going to create environmental damage. And we didn’t go after oil wells. We didn’t actually hit any oil wells that ISIS controls because we didn’t want to do environmental damage and we didn’t want to destroy that infrastructure…So, now we’re hitting oil in trucks…Maybe you get to the point where you say we have to hit oil wells. So those are the kind of tough decisions you have to make.' ” . . .