Originally Posted by
jolihokistix
I am not suggesting they should not take down the bridge, but that it may end up being more of a symbolic act, and a personal affront to Mr P.
The Russians know that destroyed railway lines can be more quickly repaired on solid land as opposed to on a bridge, which is why they are pressing ahead with the rail network throughout their newly-established land bridge joining mother Russia through Mariupol, around the Azov Sea to Crimea.
I am querying the land-bridge that you say they have. Yes, they do - and have had for most of the war - have a continuous strip of land between Rostov and Crimea, but this is just land and not the "land-bridge" which is referred toin reports. This would be a major supply route like a major rail or road -link outside of bombardment range and these links do not exist.