Ha ha ha ha ha ha, did you just compare damage to a 'bridge inside borders' to a bridge over the ocean?
Of course, I am not a bridge engineer
Large container freighters can be loaded in a port, unloaded in a port half world away in 10 days. Then the existing train / truck network can pick up the containers and move them further.
The only bottleneck there is a port and ports are much easier and faster to build than additional bridges to increase throughput.
And what you say about damage is downright silly, because the same concern applies equally for a bridge inside our borders. In fact, by your standards, the docks where those boats load their cargo should never have been built, because if one of the minimum-wage immigrants carrying cargo on his shoulders out to a small boat in waist-deep water dies of a heart attack
- ha, talk about silly.
A burning bridge stops all cargo from being moved, while a burning ship only stops that ship. Shipping docks are a scalable solution, while a bridge is a fixed throughput solution that cannot be scaled without building a second bridge.
Container ships can be easily redirected where they are needed at the time when they are needed, while a bridge cannot be moved where it is needed.
Also obviously you haven't seen Russian infrastructure, which is nonexistent in that part of the world and beside that there is no American/Canadian infrastructure to use a bridge like that either.
At the end if this project goes ahead it will never be for any economic reasons, only for political ones, so at the end there will be a gigantic price tag on this bridge to nowhere.