Question: What is more dangerouse biological or nucular weapons

Robert Hampson answered on 18 Nov 2014:

Nuclear weapons cause massive initial damage because of heat, radiation, fire, a blast, and a shockwave. They also release a large amount of radioactive dust, this contaminates the area. The air is also contaminated for a long distance downwind of the detonation site. People who breathe the air contaminated with radioactive dust often suffered from radiation poisoning and suffer long and painful deaths. Though effects are still relatively localised, many nuclear weapons have been tested in remote locations without massive repercussions worldwide.

Biological weapons are based on weaponised versions of living infectious creatures. Depending on the species and characteristics of the biological weapon, the rate of transmission, the speed of death, the amount of pain, the symptoms will change. A particularly successful biological weapon could theoretically cause a worldwide pandemic impacting both the target nation and the people who launched the weapon. Not all biological weapons are infectious organisms, during WW2 the USA dropped many different types of beetle into German crops. These beetles spread and massively damaged German (and since then European) agriculture.

Essentially, nuclear weapons cause a greater amount of damage in a small area. A biological weapon can spread and start causing its own damage and could theoretically rebound upon the person using the weapon.