Atomic Bomb or Hydrogen Bomb: Which weapons of mass destruction world does not need?

  • Atomic Bomb
  • Hydrogen Bomb
Please select one to answer and see the result

Answers

Atomic Bomb - 89Hydrogen Bomb - 142
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
if you need destruction make it big
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
too much radiation
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Atomic bomb is radioactive, which could cause more and more areas to become radioactive.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because this is very harmful to all the people as it can kill many millions of people. People are dying because of its harful radiation which cause diseases like leukamia skin cancer etc.. As we know when 2 bombs ( little boy and fat man ) were dropped at nagasaki and hiroshima many people were killed. The ladies which were saved suffered from skin cancer and when thier infants were born they were also affected. It is very dangerous to keep many atom bombs as i know pakistan is having more than 100 atom bombs.. So we should use disarmament to maintain peace all over the world.....
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Its the weaker of the two.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The hydrogen bomb is more effective, with a larger explosion making the atomic bomb obsolete
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
i dunno
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
**** pleas
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Atomic bomb doesn't needed by this world because it create a enormous amount of radiation once it exploded while hydrogen bomb doesn't create so much radiation. Hydrogen bomb is also far more powerful than atomic bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
not powerful enough
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
cause
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
cause' hydrogen bomb is stronger
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen Bombs are more powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Actually, I was trying to select BOTH of them. I picked the Atomic Bomb first because that was the order in witch I was selecting them. I guess that I'm a top to bottom kind of guy......thank you.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
with out atomic the h bomb wouldnt been though of
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
way more radiation which contaminates for millions of years leaving land useless.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
cuz we would just use more atomic bombs instead of one hydrogen bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Cause I can
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
If there is no atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs can't be made.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
if your going to nuke something. mine as well use the biggest one out there. so you can get ride of the atomic bomb because were done messing around.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Cause I felt like it
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
its a lot more unstable and therefore more dangerous to the world.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
BECAUSE HYDROGEN BOMBS DO IT BETTER!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because hydrogen bombs can put more out of their misery
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
radiatoin
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because I said so.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
with atomic bomb there will be no hydrogen bomb
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
we do need either of these horrifying weapons they are evil
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
cuz
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Without atomic bomb, no hydrogen bomb in first place
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
hjh
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because it will destroy Russia in a meter of seconds
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
With out an atomic bomb you would't have the ladder option, hydrogen bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
You can't detonate a hydrogen bomb without an atomic bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
They suck
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
without an atomic bomb the hydrogen bomb could not exist
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Obsolete.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Ineffective
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen bomb fir the win
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because like the wheel they're here to stay baby!!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I wanna say both because the world dowsnt need a weapon that can destroy it. Only meteor defence bombsI
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Lots of radiation
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
They could destroy the planet
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
lets go all out and blow the earth up. no since in doing something half assed
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
H-Bomb wouldn't be possible without the help of the A-Bomb. Although the real answer is both bombs equally suck!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because an H-bomb can't work without an A-bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
w8, m8, I still need to select the other one, too!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
we cant keep this around as part of a hydrogen bomb we don't need it
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
This bomb is confined to the affected area targeted and has shorter and lesser affection time. There are no safe places if a hydrogen bomb is detonated.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
without atomic bomb there is no atomic nor hydrogen bomb :)
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Can destroy much more, killing more people & spreading more nuclear destruction
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because without it you wouldn't have the hydrogen bomb either.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
hydrogen is bigger boom.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
If a hydrogen bomb needs and atomic bomb, then we need neither.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
we don't need bomb for mass destruction we need food and water for the poor all round the world
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
You need a small atomic bomb to set off a hydrogen bomb. No a bomb no h bomb
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
N0 fallout
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Long term distruction by residual radiation above and beyond it's original intent.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
We don't need either! It's great as a deterrent, perhaps, but I sure would prefer neither atomic nor hydrogen bombs *ever* used again.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
a hydrogen bomb requires an atomic bomb to activate it.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The A bomb started the race for murder, the arms race, and led to MAD, mutually assured destruction; dead is dead, and though Truman's use of the bomb is credited with ending the second world war, a bomb on mt. Fuji would have done the same thing...a more tactical use. I feel the world is blood thirsty, and hates to yield to the power of love, so enjoys the hateful slice of revenge killing does for them. Minds and hearts have disconnected! d
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen bombs will not work without an atomic detonation.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
go big or go home
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
bcuz they create nuclear fallout
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
weak as ****
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
the hydrogen bomb is stronger i do not see why they built a weak bomb only to build a bomb with more power
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because it can be used in both bombs. One as a triggering devise the other the actual bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because theyre typically used for violence u scrub
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
its less powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because h bombs are stronger and it provides powers to countries
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Its not that strong as h bombs
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it's too small to keep in case of a first strike against the US
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
From the above explanation of both, you would need an atomic bomb capability in order to have a hydrogen bomb. The world doesn't need either, really.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
With no atomic bomb there could be no hydrogen bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Yes,.. we don't need atomic bombs/.. we need Hydrogen bombs. hydrogen when it explodes, it makes it rain due to reaction with oxygen,
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
WHY YOU MADE ONLY ONE CHOICE POSSIBLE
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because of Radiation !
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because that's what there are more of
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The hydrogen bomb is stronger
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
no atomic bomb, means no trigger for hydrogen bomb either
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Atomic bombs are used to create hydrogen bombs. Eliminate atomic bombs and you eliminate both.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I actually believe that neither should be used because 1) they are both banned by the UN, and 2) it is simply unnecessary for that many people to die.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Fusion is good
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Less stronger
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because it is less powerful. In a war we would want the most powerful weapons to defend ourselves...and in a contest of pure power the Hydrogen Bomb wins hands down.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
people
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It produces higher levels of fallout if used. A properly detonated Hydrogen Bomb is much cleaner.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I would have a ripple effect. Once used against an enemy, retaliation from the enemy or their friend would bomb you and so on and so on, end of world. President Truman once said it is so dangerous it is safe.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
with the hydrogen bomb we have a proper deterrent for people starting fights with us. something so powerful would scare them from fighting.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it's more than enough to generate uncontrollable of 25MeV/atom of hydrogen
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
more destrutive
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because hydogen bombs have more tnt and can cause more problems for the planet. Even though the world doesn't need both.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it's more powerful than the atomic bomb
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because its' toxic
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I know
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
becouse in hidrogen bomb there is no radio active weste product's which affect'living things for long perde of time
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
the device from ****
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It is not only destructive. Even if something would endure the force, blast; people, animals, the environment (air, water, land) would greatly be contaminates by very deady chemicals, and radioactivity.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Zzzzzzzzzžzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzx
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Please note to the Human Race this is against God !
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
we dont need something that will kill so many innocent people. times have changed. Our enemy's of today hide in civilian clothes and blend in.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
neither you tard
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
WE DONT NEED EITHER OF THEM.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Please , I don't want any war .. my childrens must have a life ..by the way ..I'm 19 :| ..Peace and love !
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It is too damn powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The power to create a weapon with unlimited destruction capabilities is completely insane. In the wrong hands, a bomb could be created with the power to destroy not just cities but entire countries. The emotional, physical, environmental, and geographical devastation would out way any possible reason for such an attack.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen Bombs are more powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it's an unnecessary weapon of mass destruction that we will never have any need for.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because its size isn't limited
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
No limit to how powerful it can be.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because it is more destructive and should not destroy lifes
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
There, I have selected this one as well. I like eating burgers with cheese on them. French fries sometimes. Would hate not to be able to that anymore. At least until it's my time. Leave me alone, I don't want a bomb going off next to me. Hydrogen or Atomic.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
BECAUSE IT WREAKS
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The inability of the H-bomb to ensure that it's capacity does not overly extend it's immediate need or purpose could allow undue casuality or damages to property or resources.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
if you dont have atomic bomb youcant have hydrogen
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
With such unlimited destructive capability, one human mistake or miscalculation can end the world as we know it.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It is more powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because there is no limit to its destruction it could kill or blow up a huge chunk of the earth
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It can destroy too much stuff.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Atomic bombs will more than do the job. Why overdo things?
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because hydrigen bomb is so dangerous it will affect the whole world
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
No man should have the ability how to harness the power of the Sun
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The Nuculer bomb is already good enougth so there is no reason.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because there is no reason to have a bomb that is able to destroy the earth with one bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
i want people to die
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
too much power, unlimited potencial
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
more destructive!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
There's no limit, so one could overdose the potency of the hydrogen bomb to the point where it will wipe out half the Earth in one bombing
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
rywrhwththrhtr
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The extent of distruction go beound the sugical removal of threat and expnd distrction onto the path of the inocent
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
badder, ya 'no wht I mean?
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It has a ridiculous amount of power for destruction
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
will end the world if used
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
to powerful
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
This is a much too powerful destructive device which needs an atomic bomb of sorts just to trigger it.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It's my understanding that 40 of these H-Bombs would destroy the world....
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
actually we don't need both but h bomb is more destructive so i chose that one.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It can be made as powerful as anyone wants it to be
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
tooooooooooooooooooooooooo
stonk
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because from what I learned from the above passage.the H bomb 💣 might have the power to wipe out a island the size of japan
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
its the more powerful of the two, creating more destruction per bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because it is purew devastation and deserves the praise of its destructive power
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
More powerful than the atomic bomb. It releases 3 to 4 times more energy than the atomic bomb.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
the atom bomb is big enough to ruin someones day, why do you need smoething bigger?
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It is the one with the most damage
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
suck me
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it is more destructive and could destroy the planet could be irradiated
if we make it big enough

  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because a bombs are as much destruction as we need
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
CAUSE OF TACOS AND MCDONALDS HAVING THOSE DANG BOMBS IN MY TOILET THOSE WHIPPERSNAPPERS
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Stronger than the atomic bomb
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
becas beble dyangg af thee yuse bombang
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it hs no limits according to what I have read
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because you can't hug your kids with nuclear arms.
My unicorn told me to say that.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
lol it doesn't need very powerful weapons like this, they r too dangerous

  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
what is the point it has more power but for and/or at what cause yours or Thiers or the people your doing this for. common people weapons just make the problem worse
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
to powerfull if we droped a hydrogin bomb on another country it could cause wwiii
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Its more devastating
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
A bomb of potentially unlimited force threatens the distruction of the Earth in a fraction of a second.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It can emit more radio activity in atmosphere.we can't destruct our future
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
more destructive.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
There is no limit on how powerful a hydrogen bomb could be; and it would not be wise to fall into the hands of extremist
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because hydrogen would be more destructive in my opinion
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
We don't need any more violence and wars, mankind I killing itself and our home just to prove a point. Its **** stupid. Just because one man has a pistol, doesn't mean the other man should go and buy a AK... There shouldn't be any weapons of mass destruction... We should only use our voices and reasoning skills.. Not firepower and ignorance.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It's not measurable. I think that after the situation of Hiroshima any country should think very well on how and why a decision as that would be an option. We destroy or world and humanity... Indiscriminately who... This would add other destruction that has natural causes that contaminates our atmosphere and add a A bomb or H bomb... The holes in our climatic atmosphere... Who in God's name we think we are... Do we will have to destroy more... There is not a save place to live... With out angers, hatreds, and a thirst of power, envy,destruction, elimination of big league empowered countries, and bulling as ISIS to dominate the majority of people robbing tranquility, sleep, and creating chaos to theirs lives... Without it an ideal solution to live and live in harmony. It's may sound as I'm a dreamer. It's make me sick of people as that.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
it kills to many people
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
the atomic bomb does enough damage.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
pollution
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
What idiot wants to kill everyone on the planet. We might need the atomic bomb depending on the situation for example, the extinction of Isis,however hydrogen bomb should never exist. The power of one is extreme, no one needs such power. You need to be the world soul less, life less, heartless person in the world to even suggest using a device this this.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Why any?
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
we all die
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
As time travel to the future and mankind become older, the tolerance become less and power structure is greater. Love is greater and killing. There are no losers or winners. Eventually, the earth will seize to exist. This is what we want? The answer is a simple no! To love mankind is God. To hate God is the destruction of life as rendered. Think about it. From a child, we were loved but taught hate through mistrust. Sit at my table and enjoy my welcome and lie comfortably in my bed. Let Peace shun upon this place called Home.

Thanks

JD
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Pure Science
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The hydrogen bomb is much too dangerous and is the spawn of a psychopath (Edward Teller).
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
More radioactive and more destructive. Smoke could cause ice age!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Atomic Bombs are powerful enough. Hydrogen bombs are overkill.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
We already have enough ways to destroy ourselves
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
smaller easier to deliver with more destructive power.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
more destuctive
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
hydrogen bomb kills millions more of mankind for what reason other than you are insane
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It appears that H Bombs can be made infinitely more powerful without limits...
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I would have selected both options had that been an option!!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
unlimited power
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The hydrogen bombs stronger
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
bigger
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
3 million of those and good bye earth
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The world need life
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen bomb has no limit to its power of destruction: more radiation is created or released by the hydrogen bomb. Apparently destructiveness of atomic bomb can be controlled or limited. Neither is good for humanity.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
i have selected anetthis option because of the fact that i discovered about hydrogen bomb more destructive than the atom bomb . in my opinion neither of these weapons of mass destruction should not be used as this may wipe thelife from the face of the pl
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
why don't we **** up every **** piece of **** in the solar system and blow up the damn earth.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Mainly because there is no limit on how strong it can be made.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I have learned that a hydrogen bomb is several millions of tons of tnt.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
More dangerous
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Man has created its own demise.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
its bad
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
more powerful than the atom bomb with no limits to increasing power
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
its too strong
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
vnhncgnjgnfjg
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
BECAUSE IT'S MORE POWERFUL ****
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
****
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It's far more powerful and needs an atomic bomb to set it off. Meaning that there would be more radioactive particles in the atmosphere.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because im whiteeeeeeee
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It's to dangerous
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Best.. should have used it on the ****!!!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
because it's much more fatal than the atomic bomb. nobody would want the loss of this many live no matter the reasons
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Short answer: I found it odd that the choices were falsely dichotimzed as what the world doesn't need; a proper third choice would have been 'neither.' With that being said, an atomic bomb requires an explosive detonation with an alerting--figuratively and literally-- amount of TNT being utilized. It also has limits on power, which in any area of everyday society, a limit on power is necessary for humanity.

Hydrogen bombs, however, require very little to spawn destruction. Theoritically, these can also be mobile(in terms of undetectable detonation points, correlated areas spread out across the globe utilzing one detonation source, that creates a reaction across the globe through "clean energy" power sources such as solar panels--especially given what goes into the chemistry of solar power conductivity).

A clearer example would be, again theoritically, cars. If you have a hydrogen powered vehicle, which would also need a battery device consisting of uranium and plutonium, among other elements, you would not only have an undetectable detonator, but a mobile destruction device. Given how much more powerful hydrogen bombs can be, and given some features of vehicles like the Teslas SUV and a unheard of vehicle such as the Toyota Muriah, you could hypothetically destroy all factions deemed as enemy, and even the entire planet. Not to mention how easy this would be, given other conductive sources such as solar panel factories, Teslas gig awatt factory and so forth.

In other words, this is what a smart bomb depicts, and it is a reality that we will soon face. That's the short answer, believe it or not.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
We have more than enough destructive power now!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
An unlimited amount of destruction, if one so chooses...
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It's more destructive and is still radioactive, and the world has too many nuclear weapons already.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Because it causes more harm than help
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
firstly, even if such limitless power of devastation were sociopathically desirable, there are already more than enough atomic weapons with excessively fast deployment times to sufficiently serve as an effective deterrent against their use; secondly, since there is no known limit to how destructive h-bombs could be, there's the very real threat that even just one detonation could eliminate all life on the planet, if not actually destroy the earth itself entirely.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Too powerfully devastating. The atom bomb will destroy any target. The hydrogen bomb has a fallout capacity that can destroy life on a grand and lasting scale.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
shere distuction
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Less powerful and destructive with less radioactive debris.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
xd
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
No
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Greater destructive power
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Hydrogen is more powerful and can cause more devisatio
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
no limit on destructive forse
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
unlimited destructive potential
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
If there is no limit to its power then it would for sure cause mass destruction
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
No limit to how powerful it can be.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
It releases more energy than the Atomic Bomb
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
people
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
the world does not need anything to destroy mankind. peace, love and unit is what is needed. hydrogen bomb will not only affect the country involved in war but the whole world.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Environmental issues!!
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
becuase itcould cost the world an irreparable damage
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
I don not know
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
Much more powerful.
  • Anonymous . 3+ yrs. ago
The hydrogen bomb " - Releases a lot more energy than a typical atomic bomb and - There is no limit to how powerful it can be made"
  • Anonymous . January 2022
because its more powerful than the atomic bomb. But really, we don't need either one of them. We need to clean up the earth not blow it up, after it's the only spaceship we have to live on.

Related Questions

Related Comparisons