Russia Vows Response to 'Terror Attack' on Crimean Bridge, Ukrainian Officials Claim Responsibility

Putin has labeled the latest attack on the Crimean Bridge that killed two civilians an "act of terror," arguing that Kiev knew it wasn't being used for military transport. 

While Ukrainian officials have been quick to claim responsibility for the attack, even the White House is admitting it had no military significance and no impact on Russian forces. Yet, the West still refuses to condemn the attack and the killing of innocent civilians...

Another day, another attack on Russian infrastructure… except this time Western media aren’t claiming that Russia is going to war against itself once again, because Ukrainian officials have already said Kiev was the one responsible for the attack that killed a husband and wife and left their orphaned child seriously injured. 

An anonymous Ukrainian intelligence official wasted no time in telling CNN that the attack, which was carried out just after 3 a.m. on Monday, was “a joint operation of the SBU and Ukraine’s naval forces.” 

The location they targeted was the bridge connecting Crimea to the rest of Russia over the Kerch Strait. This isn’t the first time it has been attacked in the last year, as the bridge was the target of a bombing back in October that left five people dead.

While we didn’t get a video of Zelensky in front of a green screen taking responsibility for the attack, we did get a statement from one of his most outspoken advisers, who took to Twitter to write, “Any illegal structures used to deliver Russian instruments of mass murder are necessarily short-lived... regardless of the reasons for the destruction.”

Well, he’s not the only one spouting those claims, as Western media are also ignoring the fact that the bridge sees traffic involving tens of thousands of civilian vehicles on a weekly basis, and they’re focusing instead on its potential to be used for transporting military supplies.

But Russian President Vladimir Putin is arguing the bridge wasn’t being used for military transport, and that Kiev knew it was mainly used by civilians, which is why he has labeled the bombing a terrorist attack.

“The incident is a yet another terrorist attack by the Kiev regime. This crime is pointless from the military point of view, since the Crimean Bridge has long not been used for military transport, and brutal, since only innocent civilians were killed and injured,” Putin said on Monday.

Even the Biden Administration is admitting that the attack had no military significance, with National Security Council Spokesman John Kirby saying on Monday that the U.S. has yet to see it have an impact on Russian forces.

“We haven’t seen any impact of the strike on the bridge to Russia’s defensive posture and their military capabilities in Crimea or in Southern Ukraine … they are still fighting Ukrainian forces. They’re trying to push back elements of the Ukrainian counteroffensive,” Kirby said.

Kirby went on to state the obvious, which is that this attack isn’t harming the Russian Military, as the Crimean bridge isn’t their only option for transporting supplies. He explained, “many, many, many other ways of providing logistics and sustainment to their troops in Ukraine, so my hunch would be that this won’t have a dramatic effect.”

So, why would Ukraine target this bridge for a second time in the same year if it has no real military significance? And yes, I say a second time, because even though Western media and politicians were quick to claim that Russia must have been behind that first attack back in October… it took them just one month to change their tune…

In November, the New York Times published an article titled, “How Ukraine Blew Up a Key Russian Bridge,” in which it said quote, “Regardless of how long the bridge is damaged, the attack succeeded in giving a symbolic victory to the Ukrainians and an embarrassing blow to the Kremlin.”

A “symbolic victory” is a bizarre way to describe an attack that only killed civilians – and yet, that’s exactly what it was treated as in Kiev, where Ukraine’s postal service introduced a new stamp commemorating the attack, hours after it happened, and residents were seen taking photos of themselves with a large cut-out, in celebration. 

Of course, that celebration didn’t last long, as Russia was quick to repair the damage, and Putin himself was seen driving on the newly repaired bridge in December.

Make no mistake about it, the bridge connecting Crimea to Russia in incredibly symbolic.

It was first opened to the public back in 2018, four years after the people of Crimea voted to return to Russia. The bridge has been a thorn in the side of those in Ukraine who expect to see their borders return back to where they were in 2013—before the US and the EU backed the overthrow of the democratically-elected Ukrainian Government. 

Of course, as far as the Biden Administration is concerned, the concepts of freedom and democracy don’t apply to the people of Crimea or anyone in the Donbass who chooses Russia over the NATO-sponsored government in Ukraine.

Bearing that logic in mind, Zelensky has repeatedly pledged that the war won’t end until Kiev forces all of the territories that left in 2014, back under Ukrainian control. The comedian-turned-actor-turned-politician has certainly come a long way since running on a platform of peace between Russia and Ukraine. 

But anyways, the latest attack on the Crimean bridge may seem like an open and shut case, where Ukraine attacks and Russia vows to retaliate. Except that this has never solely been a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. 

So, as is the case every time there is an attack on Russian infrastructure, the question becomes… just how involved were Kiev’s Western backers? Because it’s no secret that the U.S., with help from the UK and the EU are quite literally propping up Ukraine’s Government and Military right now, providing the funding and supplies for them to continue to exist.

But beyond the money and the weapons, Washington also plays a significant role in collecting and sharing intelligence with the Ukrainian Military. And given the fact that the U.S. is known for spying on everyone from its enemies to its closest friends – if Ukraine is plotting any kind of attack against Russia, it’s hard to claim that the U.S. has absolutely no knowledge of it. 

Will they claim that anyway? Yes, they will. We’ve seen it over and over again. But it is believable? Not if you’re actually paying attention, it’s not.

The Biden Administration loves to claim they have a hands-off approach when it comes to Zelensky, and that HE is the one calling the shots. Well, if that’s the case, I would love to know why Russia and Ukraine were close to a peace deal in March 2022, less than a month after the war began, with a draft agreement that Putin revealed during a meeting with African leaders last month, which he said the Ukrainian Government had signed. Only for everything to fall apart a few weeks later, when then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson suddenly make an unexpected trip to Kiev to pledge more aid and talk things over with Zelensky. 

So, did the U.S. and the UK have a hand in planning the latest attack, or did they have, at the very least, the knowledge that Ukraine was planning to carry it out? And can any statements from the West be believed when they come from officials who claim they don’t enable Ukraine to carry out attacks on Russian territory. In fact, it seems like the only sincere thing coming from top NATO members is their complete refusal to condemn the latest killing of innocent civilians—and that’s something everyone should be talking about.