Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointman
It's a rail bridge and highway bridge side by side, when Russians say "Crimea bridge", they usually mean both, we treat them as one.
The main concern with possible attack on the bridge is that it would put enormous pressure on Putin to respond and there's a high risk Putin would do something stupid and dangerous in retaliation. Also, as far as I understand the bridge isn't really that important from military standpoint.
|
That's a good point. But also, he's already doing stupid and dangerous stuff so it's not like having the bridge intact is holding him back IMO. I just think that from a UA standpoint, they want at least a route to get everyone out before considering taking it down. So overall I do think the bridge is being discussed as a target, likely with US/NATO intelligence guiding Ukraine with the most effective strategy and timeline.
Unlike Russia, Ukraine isn't going to start shooting civilians in the back as they leave so the more people leave voluntarily, the "harder" Ukraine can push militarily at taking it back without backlash of any civilian casualties, no matter how justified it is at this point.
I do think that if/when Crimea is taken back, that bridge is as good as gone. Probably dismantled or an organized explosion, instead of missiles striking it.
It's definitely interesting to follow. Russia really seems to be on edge about it, as you have mentioned. Thanks for the insight. Interesting to see the thoughts from the Russian perspective.