Which do you think causes more damage a nuke or atomic bomb  ok?
604822
The atomic bomb, such as those developed in the Manhattan Project during WWII, was just a first type of nuclear weapon. The nuclear weapons developed in the years during the Cold War, after WWII, were designed to be even more destructive.\n\nWhile atomic bombs are considered nuclear weapons, in general, the average destructiveness (usually measured in kilotons) of one of those early atomic bombs is much less than the average destructiveness of the more advanced nuclear bombs that followed.\n\nIn the past few years, there has been research into making nuclear weapons that have very low levels of destruction - for use in battlefields rather than for destroying whole cities.
622054
I believe the army air corps and navy air did far more damage than artillery of WWII. Besides the two a-bombs dropped on Japan, the carpet bombing of Dresden is a prime example of the devastation left in the wake of bombing runs. That example was played over and over again in Europe, as well as the island campaigns of the south Pacific.  Then again, naval gun fire played an awfully large part in the Pacific, so I'm going to revise my answer by saying, in Europe air power was more significant, whereas in the Pacific, artillery and naval gun fire were dominant, excluding the A-bombs of coarse.
322967
To the chemist no, to the physicist yes.A nuclear explosion destroys matter and from so doing releases energy.
1145300
The use of depleted uranium is NOT the use of "low yield nuclear weapons!"  This comparison is simply invalid.\nDepleted uranium is used as is it is extremely dense, simple physics explains the use of a heavy item causes more damage than a light item as a projectile.\nNuclear weapons take advantage of the instability of certain isotopes and their ability to release great amounts of energy.\nNo valid comparison between the methods of use!
631179
Looking at Chernobyl, of coarse they can explode.  But what happened in that city was the result of a lot of human error mistakes.  In fact, looking at the documentary on it there were plenty of times when they should have stopped what they were doing and got someone in that knew what to do.  They were preceding on guesses.\n\nI believe what you parents are saying is the way nuclear reactors are designed in general today is that there are enough safe guards and fall back mechanisms so that human error would have to be rather bad for an explosion to occur.\n\nSome info on why Chernobyl happened  and realize we have come a long way since then.
814234
well that is a difficult question... actually it depends on the bomb \nalso....\nand what exactly happens is the blast covers a qutie a good area... but along with the blast the hot gases released during and after the fission also causes devastation because the temprature of the gas molecules is very high...
913702
I got interesting answers to this question and it may be the only time I gave a Shiraz best answer\n\nHEY, you people who advocate "nuking". Do you know the effects of nuclear bombs?
210501
An hydrogen bomb is a nuclear bomb--so is an atomic bomb.
271223
Nuclear weapons have been made anywhere from a few kilotons in yield to 20 Megatons and up.\n\nIt's damage will depend upon where it is detonated or how high it is detonated above the ground.  If one is detonated at ground level the damage will not spread as far as one that was detonated above ground level.\n\nCheck out the Federation of American Scientests Website.
159405
Conventional bombs are essentially a very violent chemical reaction, usually a very fast oxidation or a rapid decomposition of a very unstable compound.  In any case, a tremendous amount of heat is generated that causes a very fast expansion.  Aside from the heat generating a potential fireball, the rapid expansion creates shockwaves through the air and whatever other matter is in close proximity to the bomb.  It is this shockwave which does the most damage.\n\nAtomic/Nuclear weapons are a bit more complex, though the principles are essentially the same.  The chemical reaction is replaced by a nuclear chain reaction known as fission.  This produces a truly astronomical amount of heat, resulting in a mammoth shockwave.
1092460
the ability to make or have nuclear weapons could destroy cities and kill millions of americans in one strike and lead to a global destruction if other countries launch after. poverty on the other hand is not an iminent threat to the US and does not have the ability to take down the us or the world overnight.
312445
there is not much of a difference just that atomic bombs were the first to be built they both operate the same way. nuclear energy is taking the action of a nuclear bomb and controlling it to make power. what happens is the nuclear action that a reactor has produces heat which is absorbed by water that then turns to steam and the steam is used to turn a turbine that produces electricity.
945334
Nuclear bombs come in different sizes and types. They come all the way from the equivalent of a few tons of TNT (would you want to be next to a railroad car of TNT going off? Not me!) to thermonuclear bombs which are over 100 megatons of TNT ( 100,000,000tons!!!)\nThere are maps of "Zones of Lethality" for each size, telling what percentage of people will die in that area.\nThe sneaky thing is the radiation cloud, like Chernobyl, the Russian nuclear explosion. There are many hundreds of square miles of land, and cities, that are not safely habitable. Some radioactive isotopes last a very long time, and then decay into another radioactive isotope. These lands may not be safe for thousands of years!! These depend on prevailing wind conditions. Chernobyl's covered most of Europe. It was downplayed to avoid panic. Milk had strontium 90 for some time. It replaces calcium, is radioactive, and causes cancer.\nThere is not simple answer, except that thank God there has never been a nuclear war, because radioisotopes blown miles high by many thermonuclear bombs have long been calculated, along with debris, to be able to blot out the sun, and cause a "nuclear winter," possibly extinguishing most life on earth.\nWith nuclear bombs above ground, or at all, "safe" is a word that is very difficult to use. \nPlus the EMP, electromagnetic pulse, of a large nuclear explosion will disable all electronics anywhere near by causing a massive power surge.\nMassive induced currents. Some bombs and devices are designed expressly to do that.\nSome conventional bombs are loaded with radioactive material that will scatter and kill and sicken, a dirty bomb.\nNot fun to think about, huh? People that are cheering for the USA to use nukes in Iran had better think. They will kill us all. \nSee the movie: "On the Beach."
665922
Use of nuclear weapons equate destruction of humanity. Why is this even up for debate?
872488
A nuclear bomb is a weapon which derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions of fission or fusion. As a result, even a nuclear bomb with a relatively small yield is significantly more powerful than the largest conventional explosives, and a single bomb is capable of destroying an entire city.
408350
Ummm I am not sure what you are asking. Are you asking if TNT produces radiation? if so then, No there is no radioactive fallout from TNT.\n\nBut if you are asking if TNT can cause the same destructive damage as a nuclear bomb (without the radiation damage) then yes. that is why they measure it against TNT so we have an idea of how destructive it is.
673783
I believe that Hiroshima was always the primary target that day....I think it was Nagasaki 3 days later that was selected because the primaty target was cloud bound.  I think it was Kyoto that was the primary target for the second bomb.