Russia’s Nuclear Tsunami Apocalypse Torpedo is Named 'Poseidon'

There is no way on this earth the U.S. would attack Russia with nuclear weapons except to retailate for having them used by Russia first.

 

Get a clue. I taught history and economics for years.

 

Well, well, well:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/21...-infinite-range-is-currently-lost-at-sea.html

Looks like big bad paRussia can’t get its **** together!

 

Rephrase please. I do not speak English.

As I understand it, you ask how many times have you attacked Turkey? In other words, you ask me - how many times has the US attacked the country of a member of NATO? Did I understand you correctly?... I'm surprised .... You want to say that the US is so unreliable and mean-spirited ally that at any moment it can betray .... However for me this is not news.

 

It's really funny. Most recently, you claimed that Russia does not have missiles with nuclear engine, but today your, as the American president says, "fake news" tells about how Russia lost a missile with a nuclear engine. You decide for start, whether Russia has a nuclear engine or not.

 

This indicates the degradation of the educational system in the United States.

 

I understand. You do not know the substance of the question. I will explain. A nuclear explosion is not needed to trigger a tsunami. A nuclear explosion is needed to produce an offset of tectonic plates near the US coast. For example, such as San Andreas. The displacement of these tectonic plates causes an earthquake and, as a consequence, a tsunami wave.
San Andreas - a 1300-kilometer-long rift between the Pacific and North American plates. It runs along the coast across the state of California, somewhere overland, and partly underwater. In parallel, he goes to the faults of San Gabriel and San Jacinto. This is an area of geophysical instability that generates earthquakes with a magnitude of up to 8.5 on the Richter scale. The impact of a sufficiently powerful nuclear weapon can trigger catastrophic events that could completely destroy the US infrastructure on the Pacific coast with large-scale tsunamis.
And you should not forget about the Atlantic and Pacific transform faults. Running parallel to the coastline of the eastern and western coasts of the United States, respectively, they can serve as a source of major tsunamis, which will cause catastrophic damage to considerable depth from the coast.
I did not talk about these details just because I was sure - everyone knows about it. "Status 6", "Poseidon" and others are designed for the explosion and displacement of tectonic plates. But they can also launch a torpedo along the coast.

And further. Have you read the article? In an article by an American expert, the American text says - "Status 6" has a charge of 100 megaton.

 

Maybe it's better for you to read more books, rather than walk under the bridge and shoot water bombs?

 

прочитайте этот тролль

 

You are not going to set off an earthquake by dropping a nuke on a fault line, the plates are far more powerful than that, in fact, on a daily basis they are exerting more force than a nuke would ever do, probably every single minute actually.

I don't think you realize the power you are dealing with here, nukes can't even come close to it.

I mean, do you even realize how big the plates are and how much mass is involved in pushing or sliding against each other?

They wouldn't even recognize a nuke going off with all the power going on down there, its miniscule in comparison.

The US has actually bombed volcanos in the past to see if they could prevent an eruption or lava flow. While they didn't use nukes they did drop a helluva lot of explosives in there, and the volcano didn't even notice it.

 

Threads like this always act as an idiot detector. They really do out themselves.

 

That is an earthquake.

Let me assure you that a nuclear bomb is way more destructive than any earthquake ever has been.

San Francisco. 7.9 Ricthers.



Hiroshima. 15 KT.




So based on visual evidence I'm going to tell you that the smallest atom bomb is way more destructive than an earthquake.
And that a nuclear bomb is thousands of times more destructive than an atom bomb.


Now we have had testing of atom bombs at sea, and the results were described as "a tsunami".
And the shock waves were hundreds of feet high and the wind speeds hundreds of miles an hour.

We have long since eclipsed the destructive power of mother nature.
Or rather, we have harness some of it and can now direct it to our wishes.


You talk about 23,000 nuclear warheads. It wasn't so long ago that Russia had this many and more besides.

 

I'm going by numbers.

That Hiroshima pic looks bad but let me put this in perspective.

An earthquake magnitude 8.0 puts out so much energy it would take 63,000 of those Hiroshima bombs to equal it.

The Hiroshima bomb affected about roughly a little less than a mile, an 8.0 has the same effect over hundreds of miles, its just not directed on one area. We do not have the technology to recreate the power of an earthquake.

 

Put me at ground zero of an earthquake rather than a nuke any time!

 

Agreed but a Tzar bomba has 30,000 times the yield of the Hiroshima bomb.
And it's effects were felt over 760 miles away. Which is hundreds of miles.



And this was not detonated deep under ground, and certainly not to a tectonic fault. It was on the surface. Most of it's force went up, not out.




So individually mateys torpedo, is only 1/25 th of your earthquake.
But... the average Russian sub can carry between 25/50 of them.


Equipped with this torpedo, from it's submarine force alone, Russia would be able to produce the equivalent of 66, force 8 underwater earthquakes.

Just going by the numbers.
That is the smaller of the torpedoes being discussed.
I haven't bothered thinking about the big one.



This is lake Chagan in Kazakhstan.

Looks like any other volcanic lake.

Only there was no volcano.


It's the result of an underground test of a 104 kt atomic bomb.
7 Hiroshima's or 1/20th of mateys torpedo.

It is 400 metres wide.
Rubble from this explosion, was found in Hiroshima Japan!


We not only have the power to recreate earthquakes, we have the power to recreate volcanoes and yes, to recreate hurricanes and even tsunami's.
It is nuclear fusion. We have harnessed the power of the sun.

 

Plus Hiroshima looks worse because nearly all Japanese buildings at the time were wood construction and nuclear weapons create fire.

 

**** that. I’d rather be instantly atomized than die slowly from crush syndrome after a building falls on me.

 

And there's no idiot quite like a warmonger.

This is at least the second thread our resident vatnik has posted about this weapon. I suspect his handlers in Olgino will have him bore us with several more...

 

Good point! I was rather thinking about the fact that at least the 'quake would soon be over and forgotten, but there would be radiation contamination from a nuke which would hang around for weeks, or months or whatever?

 

I wouldn't bet on that - no way!

 

Don't underestimate the Russkies, mate? They're intelligent and extremely smart, which is more than can be said for the US and the West generally. In fact we're precisely the reverse.

 

But at ground zero, you aren’t going to notice any radiation. You are going to be dead pretty much instantly.

 

Another good point. Praps I'd better sit this one out? lol

 

The world war is already on. At the same time, Russians have nothing to do with aggression. For example. In the Netherlands, a car with gas cylinders purposefully rammed the town hall.
Savages occupy Europe. And it's not the Russians, but the European tolerant idiots in politics that are to blame for this..

P\S:
Not on the topic, but I liked the picture with a signature.



Signature. "There will be no safely on the" Foggy Albion ", till at liberty the cat Skripal, which escaped". (Murder in Salisbury, Novichok, Skripal)

 

Are you Ukrainian? Or a Jew?