I was going to write this as a comment - it got too big!
The other day my favourite YT channel - Suchominus - put up a video about the Kerch Bridge that was attacked back on October 8 2022.
It's his usual format; he makes a short video and his commenters are stoked to fill in the blanks and give vent to their inner keyboard warrior - making excited claims both over what has happened so far and extravagant claims regarding what will happen any minute now. [But not in the five days since the video went up]. Generally, over time, it becomes apparent that these lurid predictions do not materialise. But of course that doesn't matter.
For me the video and the comments raise a few thoughts about the situation and the mindset of the midwit warmongers.
I've said before that the bridge was pretty significant 2018-2022. But now Russia controls the whole Azov Sea and has a land connection to the north of Crimea, then it's probably less significant. There is also the whole Azov coast of Crimea where Russia could use amphibious ships to unload stuff in relative safety though I've seen no mention of this idea anywhere. Not to mention the ferry services at the Kerch Strait that were there prior to 2018 and still are now.
The attack last year destroyed half the car deck of the bridge and did some damage to the rest plus the fire on the rail bridge. The upshot of this is that road and rail traffic has been restricted ever since but not stopped. So the attack was partially successful. But the roadway, as per the video, is almost repaired and the rail bridge is about to get attention.
When the bridge was first attacked its intended effect on Russian logistics was a topic of discussion. But not so now. Reading through the dreaded comments this aspect now seems quite forgotten. I think there are three possible strategies:
#1 Destroy the bridge or at least keep attacking to slow or halt its use for Russian logistics.
#2 Let the Russians rebuild it and then blow it up again to maximise their waste of resources.
#3 Hit it on some auspicious date as a spectacular gesture.
Seems to me that in terms of conducting the war #1 is the only serious option. If the Ukrainians can do that, then they should. The fact the bridge hasn't been attacked again after what is now four and half months implies to me that it can't be done again easily if at all.
Option #2 is less sensible. It implies the Ukrainians can afford to sit around leaving the bridge open to waste time and money, as if the imperative to cut the bridge was less important.
And #3 seems to me like a silly, even more superficial version of #2. Because #2 and #3 are not #1 and they are all about the spectacle rather than any solid reality. These second two are what those YT commenters focus on and also we're back to their faulty two-tier psychological model - what they think Russians/Putin will think about something. A something that hasn't in fact happened yet and may not happen at all. It's weak stuff to base a war winning strategy on.
This focus on morale, the psychology, the spectacle rather than solid results appears to be something inculcated in the western mindset through years of lurid films, TV, books and, let's face it - comics. Of course this stuff isn't meaningless, we're ground down by it day in, day out via The Agenda™. I just don't think its much use against people who can shoot back and do so.
A lot of their predictions are also based on the assumption of total Ukrainian military superiority.
A Ukrainian soldier sits in an air-conditioned bunker watching puny, comical Russian efforts with amused detachment. When he decides the time is right, pausing only to check his hair in a mirror and flicking the ash off his cigarette (in a cigarette holder naturally) he taps a keyboard and the bridge is destroyed. With this tedious *yawn* formality out of the way it's time to check the menu at the staff canteen.
If one looks at the top comments they are mostly riffing on #2 or #3 in some way. The idea that it may be impossible doesn't arise. The fact the Ukrainians have left the bridge unmolested for four and half months doesn't faze them at all. Trust the plan!
truthsmiles:
Imagine being the first train engineer going across with a whole load of tanks lol.
Theres that two-tier psychology in evidence - we're asked to imagine what some unknown Russian will think. Also the assumption that not only is there the capability to hit the bridge effectively but also at the precise moment a military train is crossing.
Also conveniently overlooks the fact that the rail bridge has been in use the whole time. The first train engineer crossing it after the explosion was only a day later. So not only is this comment retarded it's also factually redundant.
However the midwit ringmaster Suchominus has liked this comment. Pathetic.
Dirty Dish:
I look forward to the update when its placed out of commission once again.
Seemingly unaware that the bridge has only been fully out of commission for one day since the attack.
The newest comment:
David Reynolds 5 hours ago:
Hurry up and finish the bridge guys. The Ukrainians have the coordinates set into their HIMARS and are sat with their finger ready on the button for when you reopen it... :)
Slava Ukraini.
More of the same #2 and #3 midwittery but Dave manages to get HIMARS in there as well. seemingly unaware that no HIMARS strikes have taken place at the range he's talking about. The Ukrainians would have to advance into Crimea itself to get within range of the bridge. Thought about that have you Dave? They hit the bridge at Kherson with HIMARS multiple times but failed to destroy it. Thought about that have you Dave? And finally Dave, why do you think wasting Russian civil engineering resources is more militarily significant that cutting the link across the Kerch Strait? You know what with that finger ready on the button.
Comments
Post a Comment