[Dr.Deth]

The unconnected roadway there has collapsed as well, so unless fire can melt concrete, and steel, and do it from distance across a body of water, I’m not buying the “accident” thing. It’s like NordStream, it was done knowing it’s beyond Ukraine capabilities but well within NATO’s.

[Monterrosa-24]

Then wouldn’t precision-capable NATO have struck the apex portion of the bridge that would be the most difficult to repair? I don’t think NATO did anything.

[Dr. Franklin]

The unconnected roadway there has collapsed as well, so unless fire can melt concrete, and steel, and do it from distance across a body of water, I’m not buying the “accident” thing. It’s like NordStream, it was done knowing it’s beyond Ukraine capabilities but well within NATO’s.

This appears to have been done on the Ukrainian West side of the bridge. If so, only Ukraine has the right to object to any explosions there under international law, since the rest of the world doesn't recognize this as a Russian bridge. No, this probably wasn't an accident, although with a bridge this long, engineering problems are possible.

[DUMBGRUNT]

I’m not buying the “accident” thing. “

Not an easy thing.

This took some insight, some exceptional execution, and a bit of luck.
Or perhaps the Russians did it?

Some history on bridge removal:

Can Ukraine destroy the Kerch (Crimea) Bridge?
https://youtu.be/kBECiXavaGA