Chechnya Threatens to Arm Mexico if U.S. Sends Weapons to Ukraine

Since the U.S. is already shipping arms to Mexico to aid in their battle against the drug cartels, I would imagine Washington would welcome Chechnya's aid as well.

Abdurakhmanov’s threat was pure contrary theatre, of course, made by one of Putin’s sycophant lapdogs, who got ‘reprimanded’ for it in turn by the boss. I suspect (purely as a thought experiment), should the US want help in providing weapons to Mexico, being publicly against it would go much farther in gaining Russia’s support. But, remaining contrary, in the end that support would likely be verbal only.

Here's another one you might like: Russian defense magazine VPK News just published an article by Konstantin Sivkov about options to destroy the US by triggering geological disasters like tsunamis and the Yellowstone Supervolcano, using special nukes. One of the subheadings: ‘Apocalypse - simply and inexpensively’.

Just as long as they don't ship the technology to Mexico!

(Is there an English translation for your linked article?)

while there's no precedence on being able to trigger an eruption that would be more damaging than the nuke was, the tsunami thing isn't terribly effective. It only goes a few miles inland and could have consequences to populations on other continents. The nuke would do more damage on land than it would by causing a tsunami.

Try Translate Safari Extension or Franker for in-line translation. Of course, Google Translate will do the same with a little bit more work. There are better quality browser translation options, but those are not free.

I’m not arguing the point, but wouldn’t you need a boatload of nukes to mimic a decent tsunami? Anyway, just read the article and think ‘force multiplier’.

Well, a tsunami is already a twofold indirect damager. earthquake or landslide -> displaced water -> tidal wave

A nuke would be better suited to causing a landslide, though it would require the necessary unstable feature in the appropriate location. Attempting to use a nuke in place of an earthquake instead would require significantly more energy in for the amount you'd get out. In the case of the instigated landslide, you're taking advantage of an already existing massive source of energy, far greater than that of the nuke you're going to unleash it with. (getting a few cubic miles of material to shift hundreds of feet under tons of water is very energetic) That's one kind of "force multiplier".

The tsunami itself is an interesting "apparent force multiplier" itself. There's an "amplification effect" with tsunamis. It's not a real amplification but it certainly has the appearance. When a landslide happens a few miles below the surface, it may only cause a wave a few inches to a few feet on the surface. But remember, that's lifting a column of water that's miles high, it's an enormous mass to be lifting, even if only a few feet. It embodies a huge amount of energy.

When that wave travels, as it approaches land, the column height is shorter and shorter. The energy remains the same. (waves are very efficient at transmitting energy in water) So the wave gets higher. This keeps up until it hits land. That's why you can start with a wave a few feet high and a few dozen feet across in the middle of the ocean and end up with a 25 foot tall wall of water for a mile back by the time it hits landfall.

Experienced sailors can sometimes recognize these "rogue waves" as tsunamis, and that's the basis of the tsunami warning systems, they're floats that measure small coordinated waves to help identify tsunamis and provide advance warning. (often an hour or more) Imagine being able to predict a tornado or an earthquake an hour before it gets to you.

Though one quality of a tsunami that's impossible to appreciate without watching the video is the [i]withdrawl[i] phase. All that water comes in, maybe 3-5 ft high, but may got a mile inland. It's actually accounts for a small percentage of the end damage that's going to be caused. Once inland, it breaks up stuff, floats and picks up debris, and then it heads back out to sea. This debris is effectively a mudslide, and can do a lot more damage, break up a lot more stuff to increase its volume, and easily take someone that was floating harmlessly in the water miles out to sea to drown. (making matters worse, there's often more than one of them, it's a bit like aftershocks for an earthquake, so just when you're rushing in to try to help after the withdrawal, another one comes in)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRDpTEjumdo

then check out the wave that comes in at 4:50... just when you thought you had a lot of water coming in, you see THAT wave curling in!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAa8BmuPqh8

dry to raging river in 90 seconds... the speed at which these things develop just defies belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAa8BmuPqh8

...except that this continent's shorelines are pretty crowded. More than a third of the American population resides in Coastal Shoreline Counties (having a shoreline that borders on open ocean). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Thanks for the links.

Translate Safari Extension uses Google Translate...

I can't help but think of Gru's plan to steal the Moon in Despicable Me.

Or a "Pinky and The Brain" plot?

hmmm, same name as the anthropomorphic plant in Guardians of the Galaxy?

no, that was Groot. But close.
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/screen_kubrick/0/40/3945379-groottr_1280.jpg.jpg