The Crimea Bridge has been hit again

a reply to: nickyw

Respectfully if we had been beaten during the Battle of Britain, and without the RAF to defend our skies, and protect our sea lanes, what was to stop the German Luftwaffe from indiscriminately bombing the nation from one end of the isle to the other?

Germany did not need to invade if they gained air superiority, combined with the U-boat fleets they had, they could have starved the nation to death and brought her to her knees within a few months.

I feel very awful for the young girl who had to witness both hers parents get killed by this Ukrainian terror attack against civilians on civilian infrastructure. She was also injured in the attack as well.

The Western media called them "Russian citizens" who were killed but it wouldn't surprise me if these people were actually Crimean citizens with ethnic Russian bloodlines like the vast majority of people that live in Crimea.

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

So how does hitting a strategic target, aka a bridge that allows resupply, in occupied territory, amount to a terror attack?

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: putnam6

Again the Battle of Britain was a brilliant DEFENSE.

Lets try you with this one.

The Battle Of Narvik. Half of Hitlers naval destroyers eliminated in the first few months of the war. Meaningful ?

Respectfully, thanks for the conversation, I'm really into all the Dark series videos, haven't seen this one.

I also dig WWII Military History and enjoy hearing other countries' viewpoints, I can talk about it for hours. Not an expert or pretend to be one, I just have my opinions, like everybody some are stronger than others.

My favorite book of all time is Robert Leckie's Delivered from Evil It's a one-volume but extremely in-depth account of the years preceding the war, the lives of the leaders of both the Axis and Allies, and the war and its aftermath. Have read it half a dozen times, the same with most of Richard Rhoads, Stephen Ambrose, James Dunnigan, and others. It's one topic I love learning about ever since i was a kid,even now I still enjoy all the opinions and conjecture.

The main point remains WWII was a dire situation for years, Europe and America were ill-prepared and were completely caught off guard by Germany's circumvention of the Treaty of Versailles their new military capabilities and tactics. None of which is the case currently with Putin and Russia

Your reply is all starting to sound like Monty. Wasn't there a quote about him? I paraphrase

Monty takes 3 times as long to do the ordinary and also expects 3 times the praise and glory

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MisguidedAngel

So how does hitting a strategic target, aka a bridge that allows resupply, in occupied territory, amount to a terror attack?

Because it's civilian infrastructure. Regardless of what occasionally gets transported over the bridge, civilians (Crimeans), supposed Ukrainian citizens, are traveling over this bridge at all hours of the day and night.

Ukraine should not be attacking civilian infrastructure when their supposed own citizens are travelling on it.

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

Do you feel awful about all the Ukrainian civilians killed by Russia who are targeted virtually every day?

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

Out of morbid curiosity, how do you feel about all those Russian attacks on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure?

originally posted by: MisguidedAngel

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MisguidedAngel

So how does hitting a strategic target, aka a bridge that allows resupply, in occupied territory, amount to a terror attack?

Because it's civilian infrastructure. Regardless of what occasionally gets transported over the bridge, civilians (Crimeans), supposed Ukrainian citizens, are traveling over this bridge at all hours of the day and night.

Ukraine should not be attacking civilian infrastructure when their supposed own citizens are travelling on it.

Do people live inside the bridge or something?

A house, a hospital, a school, a playground, a mall, there are lots of different civilian infrastructures.

A main transportation route built to establish dominance over an invaded sovereign country and used to bring in military supplies in order to launch strikes against civilian infrastructure is questionable to be deemed as such.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: nickyw

Respectfully if we had been beaten during the Battle of Britain, and without the RAF to defend our skies, and protect our sea lanes, what was to stop the German Luftwaffe from indiscriminately bombing the nation from one end of the isle to the other?

Germany did not need to invade if they gained air superiority, combined with the U-boat fleets they had, they could have starved the nation to death and brought her to her knees within a few months.

I think you misjudge the scale of the task, the weapons and the skill you attribute to the Nazis and indeed if you've ever been in a small plane exactly how much green space we actually have on this island surrounded by nimbies, you risk presenting a world where the Nazis won the battle of the beams and invented radar small enough to fit in a plane to be able to bomb a uk devoid of radar end to end.

if we where discussing the great war then that might have some merit as the deranged liberals idealism in Westminster rewilded much of the food growing land by being reliant oon imports taking us much closer to starvation than anyone appears to want to admit, so in the 20s and 30s those lessons had been learnt the hard way. rewilding is a dangerous idea then and now lets hope we don't have to relearn that one..

now if you come at it using real fears from the time and suggested the Nazis used the wmds they had stockpiled on the cities I might be inclined to agree with you in term's of how using such terror weapons could have forced an armistice.. there in lies another reason they wouldn't have bombed end to end as they feared the uk had similar terror weapons.. even during ww2 a version of mad existed..

but living on the southern coast our whole history is a layer on layer of invasion fear/paranoid, strange contraptions and bizarre assumptions.. as no one invades the fears/assumptions tend to stand as facts.. but growing up with this landscape has always left me questioning. the concrete pillboxes in roman forts, the Churchill tanks rusting on neolithic forts..

a reply to: putnam6

are we now always ill prepared for wars.. this one appears to be something like the way Britain donated its old stock to the soviets to make way for the new..

i find that thought rather concerning as it implies there is an expectation of needing the new rather than replace the old and in that context Ukraine becomes our Spanish civil war.. and Taiwan our Hong Kong, Singapore or Philippines..

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

Bridges and roads have been a legitimate target in every war down the centuries.

This one is no different.

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

BBC News - Ukraine war: Russia strikes Ukraine grain after ending sea deal
www.bbc.co.uk...


So Russia has launched a massive attack on civilian infrastructure namely grain storage sites in Odessa.

With this to boot:

"At least 12 civilians, including a nine-year-old boy, were wounded during the attacks, which also caused damage to blocks of flats, military officials said."

Will you condem this or tell us how awful you feel about this?

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

You condemn Ukraine's attack on the bridge as a 'terrorist attack'.
Do you share the same outrage for the repeated missile attacks and bombing of Ukraine civilian buildings and infrastructure?

Human beings have been attacking bridges in times of war since we learnt how to build bridges.
I'm loathe to use the phrase legitimate in the same sentence as war as I feel its a bit of an oxymoron but it really does seem quite appropriate in this instance.

In light of your previous declarations of delight over the deaths of innocent civilians and blood thirsty desire to see more death and destruction in Ukraine I really find your faux outrage comical and lacking any sort of credibility at all.

a reply to: Freeborn

It's called hypocrisy.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Definitely.

Mixed with more than just a bit of wilful ignorance.

a reply to: MisguidedAngel

Unfortunately, civilians die during wartime just as easily as enemy combatants.

If in doubt well see "The Blitz" or "The Bombing of Frankfurt or Berlin".

Or indeed what Russia is doing to Ukraine and has been doing so since day one.

The bridge may well be civilian infrastructure, but it's also a prime strategic target due to the fact that it can be and is being used to resupply Russian forces.

Russia should not be invading their peaceful neighbor but it sure as s@it has not stopped them from indiscriminately shelling and showering Ukrainian civilian targets with cruise missile and artillery barrages.

The only terrorist attack is Putin's ""Special Military Operation"".

Freedom to Ukraine and down with Putin's war and invasion.