4 ms·

People think I'm joking but we should bomb it to smithereens. The crater would probably just fill up with the water flow.

• BrianOnHN 6y ago
  What would be the total loss cost of this ship?
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  • cdelsolar 6y ago
    less than the cost of the canal being blocked for multiple weeks
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  If this had gotten stuck in 1960s Russia they would have done that already.
  • nullserver 6y ago
    And 70 years later the radiation levels would be getting back to normal.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • nomy99 6y ago
      Can use this to avoid radiation :] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs
      • fogihujy 6y ago
        Ironically, the blast radius of that thing is still smaller than the ship that would need to be blown up. If you really want to clear the canal with an explosion, it would have to be one large enough to vaporize the ship, making sure there's no debris in the canal afterwards.
• neither_color 6y ago
  This was my idea but I figured I’d get laughed out of the comments. Glad I’m not the only one considering it.
• mrep 6y ago
  Oregon tried that with a dead beached whale 50 years ago. Results hilarious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6CLumsir34 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6CLumsir34
  • nomy99 6y ago
    Not enough bomb :[
• nradov 6y ago
  How many tons of explosives would be required to "bomb it to smithereens" without leaving wreckage that blocks the canal? Please calculate and show your work.