This article spells out just how critical that one bridge is to prevent a total collapse of Russian Forces within that area.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-war-watch-hours-after-blast-bridge-connecting-russia-crimea-nearly-restored-3414682

As long as the Ukrainians keep pounding that bridge, the Russian Army in that area can't hold out.

I am dumb. Can someone help contextualize this for me? How big of a deal is this?

The Ukrainians are fierce. But I’m scared about humiliating Putin. What will happen next?

Also, did you see the Ukrainian Minister of Defense tweeted this?

https://twitter.com/OleksiyDanilov/status/1578636142055870464

Think horses, not zebras.

It's a truck.

Russia telling the world that its bridge is indestructible.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Elizrael/status/1578675708876193793/photo/1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

boat underneath

This. Unmanned seacraft underneath, timed to coincide with the rail tanker cars crossing the same spot on the rail bridge right next to it. So the original detonation took down two spans of one of the road crossings and cause the tanker cars on the train above to explode, damaging the rail crossing as well. Nice work, Ukraine!

Your elaborate theory hasn’t accounted for the grassy knoll or magic bullet.

It would take a relatively large boat as there would be nothing to contain the explosive force to direct it upward. Ideally it would be positioned next to a bridge pier to maximize damage and yet there is no evidence of significant structural damage to the second roadway span only a couple of meters away which shares the same concrete footing. There’s no evidence of any oil slick or debris such as floatation materials from a sunken boat. Also no evidence of diesel, petrol or oil burning on the water surface.

Oh, and it was Putin's birthday, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

boat underneath

This. Unmanned seacraft underneath, timed to coincide with the rail tanker cars crossing the same spot on the rail bridge right next to it. So the original detonation took down two spans of one of the road crossings and cause the tanker cars on the train above to explode, damaging the rail crossing as well. Nice work, Ukraine!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

I would guess a few cruise missiles.

Even a military designed shape charge in a truck would be hard pressed to take down a part of bridge from the surface. It would probably launch the truck 1000 feet in the air for the size of the charge needed.
The military always plants charges in the structure to down bridges they control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

boat underneath

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before I read more about it, I thought it was Russia using one of those baby nukes. I know that logically it's all not going to happen but Putin is loosing and the desperate do crazy a$$ things.

If they use nuclear it will be against civilians targets.

+1. Nuclear isn’t useful for hard targets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

Too soon to tell. From the limited photographs it’s difficult to see evidence of a truck bomb of the size needed to collapse a reinforced concrete bridge that’s only a few years old, even accounting for Russian engineering z as nd construction (most of which were done by the Dutch). Two different, non-adjacent sections of the bridge were collapsed and rail cars set ablaze on a separate span. A targeted missle strike seems more likely than a special forces operation.

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

Oliver Alexander on Twitter makes a pretty compelling case that it was a truck bomb, not a missile or a boat/similar underneath. Was a pretty credible thread.

Anonymous wrote:I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.

So what was it?

I seriously doubt it was a truck bomb. Explosion on the surface don’t do that.