The destruction from this quake, even at sea, has been horrific.
Imagine if had occured on land!
"Imagine if had occured on land!"
Actually, as it was a shallow earthquake, were it to happen on dry land in an unpopulated area (Sahara desert, or Antarctics- as long as the ice sheets do not slide) there would be no tsunamis and very little loss of life, as the damage would be mostly local in nature. But were it to happen in densely populated area like Western Europe...
I suspect this is worse because it is was in the ocean.
3 continents and many countries overa vast area have been affected.
A land quake would have been localized (although pretty bad if it had been a 3rd world main metropolitan area like what happened in Iran).
IMHO, if the quake had occurred on land, it would not have been nearly as catastrophic. Had that been the case, the quake might have devastated Sumatra, but the tsunamis would have been more limited and might not have reached Sri Lanka, Somalia, India, and Thailand.
It's too bad it occurred just off the coast.
Didja ever notice these things seem to cut loose around a full moon and highest tides???