How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Tigers!]

That bridge does not look safe.

Come on. That piece of road in intact. Where is your faith in Soviet Russian technology and Comrade Stalin Putin?

 

[Ford]

That bridge does not look safe.

Come on. That piece of road in intact. Where is your faith in Soviet Russian technology and Comrade Stalin Putin?

That'll buff out. I know a guy who does great work.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Russia is saying that the explosion in Crimean bridge was caused by a truck bomb, and from the footage and damage it sounds plausible: the road bridge that collapsed was the epicenter, and apparently caused another portion of the bridge to fall as well, damaged the adjacent lane, and set the tanker train on fire. Presumably the explosion was intended to blow up the train, which would have caused even more damage to the railway bridge, but failed to do so. Possibly a suicide mission.

I think more likely someone managed to slip a charge into an ammo truck.

That's possible. The truck came from the Russian side of the bridge. Russian Ukraine sympathizers?

I think more likely Ukrainian special forces.

The railway connection is probably easy to repair, mostly just fire damage. The second lane of the road bridge might still work, but that depends on whether there was structural damage to that side that would prevent heavy traffic. And if it was a suicide truck, stopping any future attacks of that nature just requires better inspections at the checkpoints in Russian side, so there's no fear of repeat attacks like in Antonivskyi bridge in Kherson. The effect on Russian logistics is probably going to be short-lived, but the mental blow is still huge.

If the fire softened the steel enough to deform it it could take a lot to put the rail back in operation.

As I understand, the trains are already running again.

But note that it's a few cars of passenger train, and it's a few vehicles on the surviving road. That says they've probably been severely weakened.

 

[Patooka]

GMLRS rockets have proved to be very effective against Russian logistics, and in particular there is no way Ukraine can take back Kherson if it loses that weapon. Unless it can at least advance close enough that Dnipro bridges and ferries are within regular artillery range.

I saw that article, and there was an interesting response to it on ABC radio the morning after. The US still has options. They could start shipping ATACMS for example (yes there is a metric fuckton of foreseen and unforeseen unintended consequences but it is an option, albiet a risky one). But also, the Biden Administration hasn't even spent half of what it is allowed to spend on Ukraine; there's still over 20 billion to work with. It can quite easily purchase arms/munitions from elsewhere and ship those to Ukraine. The UK, Germany and Israel manufacture their own GMLRS, for example.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Ukraine has now applied for membership in NATO.

 

[Jayjay]

The railway connection is probably easy to repair, mostly just fire damage. The second lane of the road bridge might still work, but that depends on whether there was structural damage to that side that would prevent heavy traffic. And if it was a suicide truck, stopping any future attacks of that nature just requires better inspections at the checkpoints in Russian side, so there's no fear of repeat attacks like in Antonivskyi bridge in Kherson. The effect on Russian logistics is probably going to be short-lived, but the mental blow is still huge.

If the fire softened the steel enough to deform it it could take a lot to put the rail back in operation.

As I understand, the trains are already running again.

But note that it's a few cars of passenger train, and it's a few vehicles on the surviving road. That says they've probably been severely weakened.

Why waste time with "inspections" and other western claptrap, when you can just try if the bridge holds by testing it with real trains filled with civilians passengers and listen how loudly it squeaks, da?

 

[Hermit]

This BBC story proposes the possibility that a Ukrainian maritime drone fitted with explosives might have been used. The prevailing theory of a truck bomb has been suggested by Russia, and the Ukrainian government seems to be encouraging that interpretation, saying that Russia should look "inside Russia" for the answer.

Crimean bridge: Who - or what - caused the explosion?​

Security camera footage released on social media showed a truck - allegedly from the Russian city of Krasnodar, an hour's drive from the crossing - moving west across the bridge at the time of the explosion.
Russian officials named a 25-year old Krasnodar man, Samir Yusubov, as the owner of the truck, and said an older relative, Makhir Yusubov, was the driver.

But close examination of the footage seems to show that the truck had nothing to do with the explosion.

The footage shows a huge fireball erupting just behind - and to one side - of the truck as it begins to climb an elevated section of the bridge.

The speed with which the truck bomb theory started to spread in Russian circles was suspicious. It suggested the Kremlin preferred an act of terrorism to a more alarming possibility: that this was an audacious act of sabotage carried out by Ukraine.

"I've seen plenty of large vehicle-borne IEDs [improvised explosive devices] in my time," a former British army explosives expert told me. "This does not look like one."

A more plausible explanation, he said, is a massive explosion below the bridge - probably delivered using some kind of clandestine maritime drone.

"Bridges are generally designed to resist downwards loads on the deck and a certain amount of side loading from the wind," he said. "They are not generally engineered to resist upward loads. I think this fact was exploited in the Ukrainian attack."

Some observers have noted that in one of the other security camera videos, something that looks like the bow wave of a small boat appears next to one of the bridge supports, a split second before the explosion.

...

This is not the first time reports have circulated suggesting that Ukraine has access to such clandestine equipment.

"There are well-founded reports which suggest that the Ukrainians have both surveillance and strike maritime remote controlled vehicles in service," the British explosives expert told me...

I have downloaded this video and changed the frames between 00:01:12 and 00:02:07 to show in slow motion. Instead of running for just under one second they now take almost eight. I am inclined to believe the explosion was done using the boat that emerges from under the bridge just as semi-trailer passes overhead. It is only a guess, though. The boat may have been only coincidentally under the bridge at the exact moment the explosion was effected by other means.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Big morale victory for Ukraine, but won't impact military logistics much.

That’s why they should make it an “Every Friday” thing.

.

I generally don't post in this thread, because I am very ignorant concerning almost everything. I don't know about the history, people, or even the geography. I certainly don't understand military strategy and such.

But wouldn't a 12 mile long bridge, so crucial to the Russian's war goals, be easily taken out by whoever took out Nordstream?

Whoever that was hasn't bombed the bridge. Why not? The most obvious answer to me, who doesn't claim to know anything else, is that whoever bombed Nordstream was on Putin's side of this. Or that bridge would have been taken out weeks ago.
Tom

Nordstream was probably bombed by Russia to try to finger USA. Nordstream hasn't been used yet and probably never will. So it wasn't much of a sacrifice for Russia.

The Crimea bridge is a crucial supply line for the Russian front. Especially if Luhansk and Donetsk are ever retaken.

 

[barbos]

There are still some sane people in US.

 

[barbos]

The Crimea bridge is a crucial supply line for the Russian front. Especially if Luhansk and Donetsk are ever retaken

Rail road bridge yes. But ukro-terrorists were not able to damage it.
Also, you need to look at the map.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This BBC story proposes the possibility that a Ukrainian maritime drone fitted with explosives might have been used. The prevailing theory of a truck bomb has been suggested by Russia, and the Ukrainian government seems to be encouraging that interpretation, saying that Russia should look "inside Russia" for the answer.

Crimean bridge: Who - or what - caused the explosion?​

Security camera footage released on social media showed a truck - allegedly from the Russian city of Krasnodar, an hour's drive from the crossing - moving west across the bridge at the time of the explosion.
Russian officials named a 25-year old Krasnodar man, Samir Yusubov, as the owner of the truck, and said an older relative, Makhir Yusubov, was the driver.

But close examination of the footage seems to show that the truck had nothing to do with the explosion.

The footage shows a huge fireball erupting just behind - and to one side - of the truck as it begins to climb an elevated section of the bridge.

The speed with which the truck bomb theory started to spread in Russian circles was suspicious. It suggested the Kremlin preferred an act of terrorism to a more alarming possibility: that this was an audacious act of sabotage carried out by Ukraine.

"I've seen plenty of large vehicle-borne IEDs [improvised explosive devices] in my time," a former British army explosives expert told me. "This does not look like one."

A more plausible explanation, he said, is a massive explosion below the bridge - probably delivered using some kind of clandestine maritime drone.

"Bridges are generally designed to resist downwards loads on the deck and a certain amount of side loading from the wind," he said. "They are not generally engineered to resist upward loads. I think this fact was exploited in the Ukrainian attack."

Some observers have noted that in one of the other security camera videos, something that looks like the bow wave of a small boat appears next to one of the bridge supports, a split second before the explosion.

...

This is not the first time reports have circulated suggesting that Ukraine has access to such clandestine equipment.

"There are well-founded reports which suggest that the Ukrainians have both surveillance and strike maritime remote controlled vehicles in service," the British explosives expert told me...

I have downloaded this video and changed the frames between 00:01:12 and 00:02:07 to show in slow motion. Instead of running for just under one second they now take almost eight. I am inclined to believe the explosion was done using the boat that emerges from under the bridge just as semi-trailer passes overhead. It is only a guess, though. The boat may have been only coincidentally under the bridge at the exact moment the explosion was effected by other means.

Why couldn't it just have been a frogman? Seems like the simplest explanation.

 

[Hermit]

I have downloaded this video and changed the frames between 00:01:12 and 00:02:07 to show in slow motion. Instead of running for just under one second they now take almost eight. I am inclined to believe the explosion was done using the boat that emerges from under the bridge just as semi-trailer passes overhead. It is only a guess, though. The boat may have been only coincidentally under the bridge at the exact moment the explosion was effected by other means.

Why couldn't it just have been a frogman? Seems like the simplest explanation.

Simple, yes, but not workable.

1) A frogman is unlikely to move the amount of thermite needed to create such a massive explosion.

2) The frogman would still need transport to get him/herself and the explosives to the bridge.

 

[barbos]

Nordstream was probably bombed by Russia to try to finger USA.

But it did not work, thanks to you

 

[barbos]

This BBC story proposes the possibility that a Ukrainian maritime drone fitted with explosives might have been used. The prevailing theory of a truck bomb has been suggested by Russia, and the Ukrainian government seems to be encouraging that interpretation, saying that Russia should look "inside Russia" for the answer.

Crimean bridge: Who - or what - caused the explosion?​

Security camera footage released on social media showed a truck - allegedly from the Russian city of Krasnodar, an hour's drive from the crossing - moving west across the bridge at the time of the explosion.
Russian officials named a 25-year old Krasnodar man, Samir Yusubov, as the owner of the truck, and said an older relative, Makhir Yusubov, was the driver.

But close examination of the footage seems to show that the truck had nothing to do with the explosion.

The footage shows a huge fireball erupting just behind - and to one side - of the truck as it begins to climb an elevated section of the bridge.

The speed with which the truck bomb theory started to spread in Russian circles was suspicious. It suggested the Kremlin preferred an act of terrorism to a more alarming possibility: that this was an audacious act of sabotage carried out by Ukraine.

"I've seen plenty of large vehicle-borne IEDs [improvised explosive devices] in my time," a former British army explosives expert told me. "This does not look like one."

A more plausible explanation, he said, is a massive explosion below the bridge - probably delivered using some kind of clandestine maritime drone.

"Bridges are generally designed to resist downwards loads on the deck and a certain amount of side loading from the wind," he said. "They are not generally engineered to resist upward loads. I think this fact was exploited in the Ukrainian attack."

Some observers have noted that in one of the other security camera videos, something that looks like the bow wave of a small boat appears next to one of the bridge supports, a split second before the explosion.

...

This is not the first time reports have circulated suggesting that Ukraine has access to such clandestine equipment.

"There are well-founded reports which suggest that the Ukrainians have both surveillance and strike maritime remote controlled vehicles in service," the British explosives expert told me...

I have downloaded this video and changed the frames between 00:01:12 and 00:02:07 to show in slow motion. Instead of running for just under one second they now take almost eight. I am inclined to believe the explosion was done using the boat that emerges from under the bridge just as semi-trailer passes overhead. It is only a guess, though. The boat may have been only coincidentally under the bridge at the exact moment the explosion was effected by other means.

That would mean that ukrainians are raging imbeciles.
They had access from water and decided to bomb the part which can be easily and cheaply replaced instead of bridge support which is much more expensive and easier to blow anyway (from water)

I am not saying ukro-nazis are not idiots, they are, it's just not to that degree. And don't forget that their masters (in London and Washington) who are clearly smart enough to know how to blow up bridges.

 

[barbos]

For those of you wondering how the fuck tiny Ukraine can do so well against Russia. It's because of intel.

Well, "so well" is a giant exageration. But it's true ukro-nazis are completely dependent on US, including supply of "meth" for their "drones".

 

[bilby]

Well, "so well" is a giant exageration.

No, it's not. Russia was expected to win in a short campaign back in February. That such a small nation has not only been effective in resisting Russian military might, but has now begun to drive back the invaders, is a far better outcome than anyone expected.

If anything, "so well" is an understatement. The vaunted Russian military machine are being shown to be utterly incompetent and ridiculous at every level.

 

[barbos]

Well, "so well" is a giant exageration.

No, it's not. Russia was expected to win in a short campaign back in February. That such a small nation has not only been effective in resisting Russian military might, but has now begun to drive back the invaders, is a far better outcome than anyone expected.

If anything, "so well" is an understatement. The vaunted Russian military machine are being shown to be utterly incompetent and ridiculous at every level.

Russia technically won. Ukrainian Army have been utterly destroyed. What you have now is NATO manned by ukro-drones using NATO weapons.
And even so, NATO progress in Ukraine is still very limited. Most of the drug-induced attacks by NATO is repelled with horrendous losses on ukrainian side.

 

[Patooka]

Russia technically won. Ukrainian Army have been utterly destroyed. What you have now is NATO manned by ukro-drones using NATO weapons.
And even so, NATO progress in Ukraine is still very limited. Most of the drug-induced attacks by NATO is repelled with horrendous losses on ukrainian side.

As the kids say nowadays.

 

[Hermit]

Russia technically won.

 

[barbos]

You need to stop listening to Western Propaganda.
You are still not winning. The losses NATO narco-army suffers don't qualify as winning.
And yes, Ukro-nazis have ran out of soviet era weapons and now in the process of running out of NATO weapons and people as well.