3 ms·

Could be a false flag, we don't know now and I don't think we will get the full truth. If it was the Ukranians they would never admit to it as the bridge is use

Could be a false flag, we don't know now and I don't think we will get the full truth. If it was the Ukranians they would never admit to it as the bridge is used by civilians and civilians died in the explosion. The same reason why Russia won't admit to its own terrorist actions in Ukraine. As for the explosives, besides corruption, one could improvise in all sorts of manners, especially with the know-how and resources of a state actor.

simion314 4y ago
My understanding is that "terrorism" means you target civilians with the purpose to terrorize them to push for goals. When you are a Russian retard and destroy a civilian airplane because you are dumb I would not claim in terrorism because it was not intended like that, when you target a bridge, military base , munition depo you are not a terrorist even if civilians are victims... but when you fire at apartments because you are a frustrated cunt and want to terrorize civilians then you are a terrorist state. But I think there are enough photos and videos from the bridge that experts can figure it out, even if Russian propaganda will spin some cigarette story or other weird excuse.
midoridensha 4y ago
There's nothing terroristic about killing civilians on a bridge. A bridge is a valid military target (esp. in this case), and so bombing the bridge is fine in a war. If civilians are on the bridge and die, too bad: that's what happens in a war. Bombing a hospital or a school is terroristic and illegal according to the rules of war.
- graymatters 4y ago
  Unless combatants are using the school or the hospital to conduct their acts of war from it.
  - simion314 4y ago
    Sure, but the case with the hospital, the malls and today bombing was just random acts of terror but Russia would claim that 3 different official lies by 3 different officials before they converge one something ridiculous like "in fact we were targeting some military stuff 1 km away but Igor was drunk entered coordinates wrong"

simion314 4y ago

My understanding is that "terrorism" means you target civilians with the purpose to terrorize them to push for goals. When you are a Russian retard and destroy a civilian airplane because you are dumb I would not claim in terrorism because it was not intended like that, when you target a bridge, military base , munition depo you are not a terrorist even if civilians are victims... but when you fire at apartments because you are a frustrated cunt and want to terrorize civilians then you are a terrorist state. But I think there are enough photos and videos from the bridge that experts can figure it out, even if Russian propaganda will spin some cigarette story or other weird excuse.

midoridensha 4y ago

There's nothing terroristic about killing civilians on a bridge. A bridge is a valid military target (esp. in this case), and so bombing the bridge is fine in a war. If civilians are on the bridge and die, too bad: that's what happens in a war. Bombing a hospital or a school is terroristic and illegal according to the rules of war.

graymatters 4y ago
Unless combatants are using the school or the hospital to conduct their acts of war from it.
- simion314 4y ago
  Sure, but the case with the hospital, the malls and today bombing was just random acts of terror but Russia would claim that 3 different official lies by 3 different officials before they converge one something ridiculous like "in fact we were targeting some military stuff 1 km away but Igor was drunk entered coordinates wrong"