Hacker News Reader

Comment by DeWilde | Hacker News Reader

Occam's razor leads me to the conclusion that it was most likely done by the Ukrainian intelligence agencies and that the truck was loaded with explosives.

Question is did the driver know or was he unavare.

View on HN

For me this is weird because the truck was coming from Russia and there are checkpoints too, so Ukrainians would need to have somehow access to explosives inside Russia. In theory you would find more Ukrainian sympathy in Crimea and not in Russia, but I do not know that area of the world so maybe the level of incompetence in Russia is even larger then I thought.

It could be that truck, but it could be the Putin "clever" tactics to claim Ukrainians are terrorists(for some reason Russians started to use the terrorist word when a military target is bombed but when they bomb civilian apartments and malls it is just the old soviet incompetence excuse)

> In theory you would find more Ukrainian sympathy in Crimea and not in Russia

Not necessarily. It is close to the Caucasian region and Russia has been involved in hostilities there for centuries.

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.

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.

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.

Unless combatants are using the school or the hospital to conduct their acts of war from it.

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"

Please do not confuse Occam’s razor with ignorance and cognitive bias.

How did it lead to the truck being the source of the explosives though? How did they time the explosion to the train's crossing so well?

Feels to me like attacking from the ocean would have a higher probability of success than trying to sneak a truck packed with explosives onto a bridge that (one assumes) the Russians are very watchful over.

By being packed with explosives. The video of the inspection of the truck before it crossed the bridge shows a not very thorough inspection and it was not X-rayed.

Also the underside of the bridge is untact as far as burn mark go.

And in terms of timing, even if the driver was unaware (i.e. wasn't a voluntary suicide mission), all it would take is a radio detonator and someone watching from afar with a telescope, if not a drone.

Ah true, I had assumed that the inspection would be a lot more thorough given the propaganda significance of the bridge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com