TheBelgian

The fact there are collateral damage, yes, the fact that is intentional annihilation, nope.

You want to see what is it for a country loosing its infrastructure during a war? google: "how much infrastructure was destroyed in Iraqi, Syria, Afghanistan ?" And "how".
It is not with 2 mortars blowing up a kitchen and fighting on the field.

Ukrainians still have broadband internet, can shop on Amazon and our officials can travel freely in Kiev.
Even Sean Penn could deliver in hand his golden toy to a country leader who should be in a bunker instead of making photo-shoot if he or Kiev was really threatened!

Freaking joke!

I forgot a part. The thing is not Ukraine would need more justification but the West.

This is a proxy war with the help of a formerly comedian, Zelensky.

What's the point of flooding a region by destroying your "assets" when you could mass bombing like a deaf these villages.
After all, the west sells the war like an hegemonic move with mass slaughtering traits. Why Russia is not so heavy on using aviation, then?
US were using tomahawks on Syria for less than that.

If destruction and high toll number (aka ethnic cleansing) was the goal, they won't deliver like a grocery shop.

Aliexpress and Amazon still delivers in Ukraine. For a country in war and subject to unpredictable attacks, it's quite a level of commitment.

Ho and Ukrainian TV is still emitting, you still follow your tv show.

And I could easily flip the question around to OP. Why would Ukraine blow up their own dam,

To justify more retaliation against Russia. Our dick of minister Charles Michel called it a war crime.

Crimea has 1 year worth ?

And what happens on year 2?