Now that Ukraine is building Flamingos so won't need outside permission for targets, there is a lot of chatter about the Kirch bridge being a target again.

The early test attacks with the Flamingos have been less than spectacular as they aren't stealth and so far don't appear to be the most accurate in targeting.

Hopefully that will improve.

It's notable that Ukraine has been hitting radar tracking sites in Crimea heavily which suggests that is in prep for an attack on the bridge.Of course it's obvious that Ukraine WANTS to end the bridge, but I question is if that's the best use of their resources.

What do they actually gain by destroying it?

A huge morale boost of course.

Maybe a message to Russians in Crimea to consider self deporting.

But otherwise strategically I'm not sure if it should be a top target.

Also I think each Flamingo is a million dollars. It will take several of them to destroy the bridge and also perhaps most concerning, it there is all out effort to destroy the bridge and it fails, it would have the opposite impact on morale. This goes back to the risk vs. reward on this.

Any thoughts?

 

There is another theory about this that says that Ukraine does not actually want to destroy the bridge anytime soon but wants the more recently imported Russian nationals living in Crimea to know that they can do so when the want.

The point of that is to nudge such people into fleeing Crimea over the bridge while they can safely do so without needing to use the war torn land route.

That makes sense in that if Ukraine does try to retake Crimea, it will be a nightmare if the population is mostly imported Russians. 

On 9/15/2025 at 1:06 AM, Jingthing said:

if the population is mostly imported Russians. 

In 2014, the population of Crimea was 2.3 million. After the annexation, approximately 60,000 people left Crimea, including 25,000 members of the Ukrainian army.

The population of Crimea in 2025 is estimated at approximately 2.46 million.

How did you conclude that the 'population is mostly imported Russians'?

5 hours ago, VBer said:

In 2014, the population of Crimea was 2.3 million. After the annexation, approximately 60,000 people left Crimea, including 25,000 members of the Ukrainian army.

The population of Crimea in 2025 is estimated at approximately 2.46 million.

How did you conclude that the 'population is mostly imported Russians'?

Your numbers sound dodgy.

 

www.kyivindependent.com/media-around-800-000-russians-have-moved-to-occupied-crimea-since-illegal-annexation-in-2014/

Up to 800,000 Russians have reportedly moved to Crimea since occupation in 2014

Up to 800,000 Russians have moved to occupied Crimea since its illegal annexation in 2014, and around 100,000 Ukrainians have left, in what amounts to a larger Russian project of remaking the peninsula's demography, said Vladyslav Miroshnychenko, an analyst for the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union (UHHRU) on Dec. 6.

The figure matches previous estimates made by other Ukrainian officials. Tamila Tasheva, President Volodymyr Zelensky's permanent representative for Crimea, said in July 2023 that between 500,000-800,000 Russians had illegally relocated to the peninsula since 2014.

Following the illegal annexation in 2014, Russia implemented policies designed to increase the share of Russians in Crimea, while simultaneously forcing or otherwise pressuring Ukrainians to leave.

 

www.jamestown.org/program/demographic-transformation-of-crimea-forced-migration-as-part-of-russias-hybrid-strategy/

Demographic Transformation of Crimea: Forced Migration as Part of Russia’s ‘Hybrid’ Strategy - Jamestown

Since 2014, Russia has been employing traditional Soviet resettlement practices and forcibly changing the demographic composition of the population in Crimea (see EDM, May 30, 2019 and August 6, 2019). The imposition of Russian Federation citizenship on residents of Crimea (nearly all residents of the peninsula had Russian citizenship less than a year after the annexation), forced deportations, the unlawful conscription of local men into the Russian military, persecutions and imprisonments of pro-Ukrainian activists who stand against the occupation, repressions against the Ukrainian Church, as well as closures of Ukrainian schools triggered a mass departure of Ukrainians (including Crimean Tatars) from Crimea. According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, almost 48,000 people left the peninsula for Ukraine during the last seven years (Krymr.com, January 6, 2021). The number of those who moved to other countries may be higher.

 

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, almost 48,000 people left the peninsula for Ukraine during the last seven years

Your numbers only prove that there were not "mostly imported Russians" in the peninsula. I will use your figures even though they come from a Ukrainian source, which has a higher chance of inflating the numbers rather than underestimating the reality.

According to the numbers from your sources, 100,000 people left during the annexation, and an additional 60,000 left in the following years, for a total of 160,000. In the same period, the population of Crimea increased from 2.3 million to 2.46 million.

Let's calculate the number of "imported Russians": (2,460,000 - 2,300,000) + 160,000 = 320,000

This does not make them "mostly" imported, by any measure.

1 hour ago, VBer said:

Your numbers only prove that there were not "mostly imported Russians" in the peninsula. I will use your figures even though they come from a Ukrainian source, which has a higher chance of inflating the numbers rather than underestimating the reality.

According to the numbers from your sources, 100,000 people left during the annexation, and an additional 60,000 left in the following years, for a total of 160,000. In the same period, the population of Crimea increased from 2.3 million to 2.46 million.

Let's calculate the number of "imported Russians": (2,460,000 - 2,300,000) + 160,000 = 320,000

This does not make them "mostly" imported, by any measure.

I realize you routinely post Kremlin propaganda but you outdid yourself with disingenuousness here.

-- You failed to mention the import of

EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND Russians after the invasion/occupation of Crimea by genocidal war criminal Putin. 

-- The Jamestown link is not partisan and not Ukrainian.

It was actually founded by Russians.

I did make an error with the mostly comment but the idea is EXACTLY the same as to why Ukraine might not actually want to blow up the Kirch Bridge anytime soon if they can first "persuade" the Russian invaders to realize they don't have a future there so they just leave by making it clear that Ukraine COULD blow it up anytime they wish.

Whether it is true or not that this is Ukraine's strategy probably can't be known but it's a reasonably logical theory anyway.

IF Ukraine goes ahead anytime soon trying to or succeeding the bridge BEFORE a mass exodus of Russians, that would prove the theory was incorrect.

47 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

import of

EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND Russians after

lets do the simple math. 2'300'000 been in Crimea, 160'000 Ukrainians left, 800'000 Russians imported. So, the current population of Crimea is around 2'940'000, correct?

1 hour ago, VBer said:

lets do the simple math. 2'300'000 been in Crimea, 160'000 Ukrainians left, 800'000 Russians imported. So, the current population of Crimea is around 2'940'000, correct?

Stop playing games.

What was the source for your initial population figures?

It was very sleazy to leave that out.

Also the exact numbers are irrelevant.

It's obviously a fact that Putin in the Soviet tradition did import a massive number of Russians to stolen Crimea.

That wasn't the point of the theory of why Ukraine even if they can blow up the bridge may not.

But I get it -- anything to further the Kremlin narrative.

 

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

What was the source for your initial population figures? It was very sleazy to leave that out.

Is state.gov credible enough?

https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-report-on-international-religious-freedom/ukraine/crimea#:~:text=The Crimean Peninsula consists of,of the peninsula is 2%2C353%2C000.

 

So, using your numbers, the current population in Crimea is around 2'900'000, correct?

 

 

8 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's obviously a fact that Putin in the Soviet tradition did import a massive number of Russians to stolen Crimea.

How did he do it? How exactly did he force 800,000 people to relocate? Can you provide a link to a credible source?

9 minutes ago, VBer said:

 

 

How did he do it? How exactly did he force 800,000 people to relocate? Can you provide a link to a credible source?

The same way Putin has sent about 1 million Russians to their deaths at the  meat grinder. Putin commands, Russians obey. That's what dictators do.

 

As a naive question, yours takes some beating.

1 hour ago, VBer said:

Is state.gov credible enough?

https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-report-on-international-religious-freedom/ukraine/crimea#:~:text=The Crimean Peninsula consists of,of the peninsula is 2%2C353%2C000.

 

So, using your numbers, the current population in Crimea is around 2'900'000, correct?

 

 

How did he do it? How exactly did he force 800,000 people to relocate? Can you provide a link to a credible source?

You're deflecting from what this is really about.

The fact that many Russians DID move to Crimea after the invasion/occupation.

The fact that Ukraine hopes to reclaim Crimea.

Nobody said that is likely anytime soon or that it won't be very difficult regardless. 

The fact that as difficult as that might be militarily, it may not be worth it if the place is filled with too many hostiles.

So obviously from Ukraine's POV the fewer Z fascist Russians living in Crimea the better.

So what this topic is actually about is the bridge and Ukraine's intentions (timing wise) are on it.

This war (referring to all of Ukraine now including the illegally occupied parts) unlike what the feckless morons Trump and Witkoff think is about a lot more than real estate. It's about PEOPLE. 

 

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's about PEOPLE. 

If it's about the people, then can you answer one question? The people who have been living in Crimea, who were born and raised there, who have not left after the annexation, and who are now the majority in the peninsula, do they want to return to be governed by Ukraine? What do you think?

Isn't the Kirch bridge spiked with SAM systems? If so the Ukranians would need to sacrifice a lot of missiles to destroy it. Once the bridge destroyed, the SAM systems would be repositioned elsewhere where the Ukranians may not want them to be. It may be better tactics to let the bridge immobilize a good chunk of Russia's air defence. Only speculating.

7 minutes ago, VBer said:

If it's about the people, then can you answer one question? The people who have been living in Crimea, who were born and raised there, who have not left after the annexation, and who are now the majority in the peninsula, do they want to return to be governed by Ukraine? What do you think?

Some do. Some don't. Those who have refused to play along with Z Russian fascists have been persecuted so it's impossible to get an objective reading.

3 minutes ago, JackGats said:

Isn't the Kirch bridge spiked with SAM systems? If so the Ukranians would need to sacrifice a lot of missiles to destroy it. Once the bridge destroyed, the SAM systems would be repositioned elsewhere where the Ukranians may not want them to be. It may be better tactics to let the bridge immobilize a good chunk of Russia's air defence. Only speculating.

That's interesting.

I haven't heard that theory.

There are most likely multiple factors that the Ukrainian leadership is taking into account about the future of the bridge.

36 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Some do. Some don't.

In your opinion, which side will have the majority?

9 minutes ago, VBer said:

In your opinion, which side will have the majority?

Irrelevant.

Crimea is Ukraine. 

If the majority of people in San Diego wanted to join Mexico they would hsve no legal right to put that in effect. 

I get your game trying to rationalize what Putin has done. It doesn't wash.

10 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Irrelevant.

The fact that you're not giving an answer suggests that you know the answer, but it just doesn't correspond to your point of view. You're the one who said that people are the priority, and now you've switched back to legal rights.

In my opinion, it was a very big mistake for Putin to take Crimea. It's the primary reason for the situation we have now, and for a situation no one knows where it will end. What makes this fact irreversible is that in his mind, it's his main historical achievement, and it is deeply supported by both the Russian population and Crimeans. The whole country and its dictator are ready to pay any price for it, even the price of the world's existence. For me, this acquisition isn't worth the consequences that have already come, and the consequences that might still come.

1 hour ago, VBer said:

The fact that you're not giving an answer suggests that you know the answer, but it just doesn't correspond to your point of view. You're the one who said that people are the priority, and now you've switched back to legal rights.

In my opinion, it was a very big mistake for Putin to take Crimea. It's the primary reason for the situation we have now, and for a situation no one knows where it will end. What makes this fact irreversible is that in his mind, it's his main historical achievement, and it is deeply supported by both the Russian population and Crimeans. The whole country and its dictator are ready to pay any price for it, even the price of the world's existence. For me, this acquisition isn't worth the consequences that have already come, and the consequences that might still come.

No I really don't know.

Many morons think that just because a Ukrainian is a Russian speaker or lives in Eastern Ukraine automatically means they are pro Russia, and anti-Ukraine.

That idiocy is COMPLETELY FALSE.

I will acknowledge one point. Of all the lands that Putin invaded and occupied, Crimea is the most problematic and would be the most difficult for Ukraine to reclaim.

Doesn't mean it's impossible though.

Again to the actual topic, it is in Ukraine's interest to have as many Z Russian fascists living in Crimea to leave peacefully thus the idea that maybe (not certainly) delaying a new attempt to destroy the bridge is related to that goal. 

I'm not making any predictions either way.

As far as Putin's psychology really if he's perceived to have lost the war in any way regardless of Crimea, he's destined for a high window.

I reject the nuclear threats though. That's playing right into Kremlin propaganda.