Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why has the Crimean Bridge, also called the Kerch Strait Bridge, not been blown up? [View all]bluewater
(5,376 posts)54. "while minimizing the risks to Ukraine" as Ukrainian cities are reduced to rubble
and the war is expected by many experts to drag on for months and most likely years.
Since you raise a point that NATO personnel would be required to destroy the bridge, allow me to repost my reply from upthread in closing:
Your insistence that NATO can't train Ukrainians sufficiently is noted.
I disagree with the premise, but there we are.
I believe that there are Ukrainian Armed Forces members trained in their own sophisticated missile and air-defense systems that could be trained over weeks, or even a month if necessary, to be able to operate such NATO equipment.
I disagree with the premise, but there we are.
I believe that there are Ukrainian Armed Forces members trained in their own sophisticated missile and air-defense systems that could be trained over weeks, or even a month if necessary, to be able to operate such NATO equipment.
That said, let me say this now, I appreciate everyone that has participated in the discussion in this thread and have found your views informative and well reasoned.
I feel that on the larger topic of how best to end the war while containing Russia's brutality as best as possible, that reasonable people can and will have reasonable differing, and, at times, even opposing, views.
I have found that these discussion often reach a point where all parties have stated their arguments clearly and yet agreement on the best solution cannot be reached.
I feel that is important to acknowledge that moment and then to politely agree to disagree.
So, thank you very much for the discussion.
Best regards,
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
66 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Why has the Crimean Bridge, also called the Kerch Strait Bridge, not been blown up? [View all]
bluewater
Mar 2022
OP
We're not talking about NATO destroying but Ukrainians who are already firing into Russia
uponit7771
Mar 2022
#12
It has been surprising that more bridges have not been blown and roads cratered
dutch777
Mar 2022
#2
"Ukraine has no missiles capable of reaching it" Are we afraid of giving Ukraine missiles that could
bluewater
Mar 2022
#5
"Plus there are water pipelines on that bridge that feed russian troops in Crimea."
bluewater
Mar 2022
#22
The OP is talking about logistics. The bridge should be blown to prevent Russia
Quixote1818
Mar 2022
#31
"That it has not is part of strategic planning" oh, please, that's sophistry.
bluewater
Mar 2022
#11
That bridge has always been beyond the range of the missile mentioned above
muriel_volestrangler
Mar 2022
#38
So, you agree the US and NATO feel Russia would view it as crossing a red-line
bluewater
Mar 2022
#48
Well, it certainly would cross that line, since NATO would actually have to man the missiles
relayerbob
Mar 2022
#52
"while minimizing the risks to Ukraine" as Ukrainian cities are reduced to rubble
bluewater
Mar 2022
#54
You're the thread starter with the questions about hitting the bridge
muriel_volestrangler
Mar 2022
#49
So, basically, yes, the US and NATO are afraid it would be viewed as an escalation? OK
bluewater
Mar 2022
#51