by Larry C Johnson

{mosmap width='500'|height='400'|lat='33.328233'|lon='44.400172'| zoom='3'|zoomType='Large'|zoomNew='0'|mapType='Satellite'|showMaptype='1'| overview='0'|text='Baghdad'|tooltip='Iraq'|marker='1'| align='center'|key='ABQIAAAAr1I7MW78hgGObloGKO3wzRRDpmMZxxqZV8fOQQZ_U63XUjRjwRQ1orJhqp0meqdzcsb5w-hVWKqR-g'}

Moving around Baghdad already is a logistical nightmare.  The loss of a bridge in north central Baghdad will reduce commercial activity and increase traffic jams.  This will damage, at least for the short term, economic recovery in Baghdad.

It also creates new and dangerous challenges for moving U.S. troops within the city.  U.S. forces have one less route available.  They cannot quickly move reinforcements across the river in that sector.    

The destruction of the bridge is a significant technical accomplishment for the group that planned and carried out the attack.  I do not buy the explanation that this was a mere "truck" bomb.  I am not familiar with any truck bomb in the world that takes out two ends of a bridge simultaneously.  In fact, if it was the result of a truck bomb you would expect a hole in the pavement,i.e. a crater.  While it is difficult to tell from the picture it sure looks like the bridge was sheared at two separate points and an entire section of the bridge fell intact into the water.  That is not what one would expect from a blast from a truck bomb.

Can't wait to hear John McCain and Lindsey Graham describe the bombing of this bridge as just another sign of success with the Petraeus surge.  I'm not sure how much more success like this we can endure.