Rant
Imagine a Kung fu master that sees an oppressor enter a village, who then kills innocents indiscriminately. That Kung fu master does not lift a finger to help victims, or stop more killing. Then furthermore, he says that what he sees happening is A-OK. He does not even have the honor and truth to say that it is a crime but he is either too afraid, or he does not give a sh**. This is the thinking of modern China not just the leaders. People are a reflection of who they follow collectively.
Imagine a ruler, out of the blue he declares new countries within another country, and then says he is going to rescue them from tyranny, and then does that by bombing the sh** out of said "new" countries. Only people who are just like Donald Trump would think that was brilliant. Which, even IF it was a fact, and not the opinion of a mad man, that these so called "new" countries were "sovereign" countries another country, then those "new" countries still did not ask for any rescuing prior to being invaded 7 days ago (should be majority and in fact was not, actual in my opinion the fraction is much less than 0.0000001%) .
If we define a "country as a treat" as a country with nukes and no sense of self or world preservation, then all countries that gave up all their nukes cannot be defined as a threat by the first clause.
Any person that is then claiming such as country is a treat, that person is illogical/full of it.
Question
How would you defend against an underwater nuclear torpedo... designed to move slow and quiet, and also packed with enough payload to cause a half a km high tsunami in shallow water... intended to contaminate said water and poison all (in real style) on the coast with the radioactive fallout.
Some ideas: Drill a hole in mega-lithic rock, double a large garbage bag, cover self, and shelter in hole, hold breath as tsunami passes.
More expensive solution: Dig separate rooms in mega-lithic rock, make water tight. Enter until tsunami passes. (I am clusterphobic so I would prefer to go hug the tsunami.)
Defense against aerial nuke: When offensive nuke is in the air, counter launch with significant number of non-nuke regular payload missiles to increase chance of destruction in best corner as possible.
The Rules are:
Answers must be complete, and each statement must be sound/logical.
More than one answer can exists, until its proven false. Hypothesis and theory varies, but scientific logic used must be sound. For example, no marks for cyclic logic. Another example, in cause and effect, no marks for declaring a cause without completely deriving that cause from a generally known and proven fact.
The better the answer, then the more points awarded. Answers can always be updated at anytime as we learn something new everyday.
(I do not claim to have THE answer. I will just attempt to provide a possible answer)
The greater the difficulty, the greater the points. I will give an answer at end of week/month ... hopefully. Repeating my answer awards no points, you will have to come with a better or alternate answer.
I emphasize that Logics is key to getting points aka "Sound logics" aka "there is no other type of logics". It is either logical or illogical. (Some people claim other forms of logic like administrative logistics which they essentially hide some of the steps because such steps are nefarious and then claim that they are using a special type of logics. That will give you zero marks here. Each step must be given) I believe that we are smart people here, so we logically know that "Many people having the same answer" does not automatic conclude, or imply, that that answer is THE answer. What can make an answer THE answer is sound logics and proven experimental tests.)
Difficulty
A-Level to Tertiary Level Physics
A-Level to Tertiary Level Computer Science
A-Level to Tertiary Level Information Technology
etc
Site share of the week/month
The Science Asylum - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXg...wwnLeQ7DXTwXPg