Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | YouTube |
Published | 2022/10/11 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
Beau breaks down the misconception around bridges, exposing their military significance and debunking the idea of bridges for military use being classified as civilian infrastructure.
Military history enthusiasts
The detailed examples and historical context provided by Beau in the full transcript.
#Bridges #Military #Warfare #Misinformation #Ukraine #Infrastructure
Well, howdy there, Internet people. It's Beau again.
So today, we are going to talk about bridges
and various kinds of bridges
and all of the discussion that's going on about bridges.
Because there are people who are either uninformed
or they are intentionally misframing something.
So we're going to kind of go through it.
I'm picking this just because it's one of a hundred people
talking about it and using this framing.
It's insane to me that this guy, I'm this guy by the way,
is talking about a deliberate attack
on civilian infrastructure.
Civilian infrastructure.
Is it, Beau?
Is a bridge used to move troops and supplies?
Is that civilian infrastructure?
It's a military objective.
It's been a military objective since there were bridges.
In fact, I'm fairly certain that if you could go back to prehistory,
you would find men in loincloths with sharpened sticks
fighting over the shallow part of the river.
Anybody who is trying to tell you
that a bridge used to move troops and supplies
is civilian infrastructure either knows nothing about war
or is deliberately, deliberately misleading you
and misframing this.
Let's talk about something else as a comparison.
Let's talk about all the Ukrainian bridges
that have been hit by Ukrainians.
Everybody's talking about how Russia hit civilian infrastructure.
That's fine.
I mean, you can talk about that if you want to,
but really that's kind of a whataboutism.
It's showing the nature of war.
It's better to point to Ukraine taking out Ukrainian bridges
because that shows it's a military objective.
It's something to cut routes, slow advances.
It's a military thing.
Taking out bridges has always been a military thing.
In fact, if somebody's initial video
talking about their assessment of what's going to happen,
if that didn't include Ukraine dropping their own bridges,
I would doubt their assessments
since I know somebody's going to ask February 10th,
let's talk about the futures of Ukraine and Russia.
That was mine.
It's that common.
In that video, I say something to the effect of,
you know, it doesn't take a lot of people.
You just need a few who know what they're doing,
and there's only so many ways to get from point A to point B.
And that bridge, we're going to make that super unsafe.
It is an integral part of war, cutting routes.
Anybody who is trying to sell you on the idea
that a bridge used to move troops and supplies
is civilian infrastructure is trying to sell you a bridge.
Anyway, it's just a thought.
Y'all have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}