Nuclear Weapons

In my opinion, unlikely.

Riddick usually carries two small knifes called "Shivs". Other than that he used normal guns like a pistol of rocket launcher. He preferes hand-to-hand weapons.

no

There is an extremely wide variety of weapons in use by the military. Such as, Assault Rifles, service pistols, LMGs, HMGs, RPGs, SOGs, Tactical Bows, Javelins, Howitzers, Tanks, and much more.

To be honest there were a hodge podge of arms used, standard yugo versions of the Ak-47 (M70, M72, M76), Even old WWII and WWI surplus, SKS M59/66, Mauser Variants, Mosin holdovers etc. If it was there it was used.

Nearly 40 countries ended above ground nuclear tests.

The Jornado del Meurto inside what is now Whitesands Missile Range.

That is a very, very good question. Their only use is mass destruction, and when I say mass destruction, I mean life as we know it being severely altered.

No.

i need this answer PLEASE.

Like anything that contains the word "weapon", it's dangerous.

Mostly because Nuclear weapons can cause long-lasting radiation, which causes leukemia and radiation poisoning. That's on top of the enormous amount of destruction that take place when the shock waves from the detonation go through cities.

The Atomic Bomb.

1. H. G. Wells used the words "atomic bomb" in his 1914 novel The World Set Free.
2. Leo Szilard filed the first atomic bomb related patent in 1934, on the neutron chain reaction.
3. A joint German and Swedish team discovered nuclear fission in uranium-235 in 1939.
4. The US Manhattan Project developed the infrastructure to build atomic bombs, beginning production in 1945. This project employed tens of thousands of workers.

Yes, specifically, this state: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8g3Gb5-jaY

fifth rank in nuclear weapons

The main strategies for nuclear attacks since the years following WWII has been deterrence, limitation, and non-proliferation. The Allies adopted a strategy called Mutual Assured Destruction (apt acronym MAD) which called for a massive retaliatory strike against the Soviet Union should any Allied nation be attacked by the USSR. In more recent years, Anti-Ballistic Missile technology has been rapidly coming online as a significant response to the threat of nuclear launches from terrorists or nations like North Korea or Iran.

As missile and nuclear submarine development pushed ahead in the 60's, the United States and other NATO allies adopted a Strategic Deterrent stance known as the Nuclear or Strategic Deterrent Triad - Submarine, Bomber, and Ballistic Missile nuclear weapons delivery capability. In later years, mobile rail systems were added as part of the ICBM leg of the triad. In effect, an attacking nation could likely hit land based military targets that were stationary, and might get most of the bombers, but mobile underwater platforms difficult to detect were then, as now, virtually impossible to plan for. As a result, any attacking nation was deterred by knowing they'd be history even if they were to launch a first strike against a NATO nation successfully. That strategy worked and kept the world at relative peace for almost 50 years.

During President Ronald Reagan's terms of office, he realized that the only way to remove the threat of nuclear weapons attack was to render their use ineffective. As a result, he initiated the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI, or Star Wars), which was the first step toward abrogation of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty signed between the U.S. and USSR, prohibiting both nations from developing ABM weapons. Though funding was cut by President Clinton, viable intercept weapons are now online, using airborne lasers, sea and airborne launched missiles, and other weapons to successfully intercept ICBM's in their boost phase where they are most vulnerable. Lasers are also fast enough to track and destroy incoming warheads. In 2002, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty.

The breakup of the USSR has created a more dangerous world threatened by nuclear attack today more than ever. Nations like North Korea, which has successfully tested nukes, and Iran, are more than willing to use them for political purposes. While North Korea can and will likely be restrained by China, Iran won't, though it will likely be the target of a pre-emptive strike by Israel before it ever gets that far. Iran successfully test fired a missile capable of carrying a small warhead from a truck-based mobile launcher placed inside the hold of a Merchant ship. The ramifications are huge - a Merchant vessel could literally approach U.S. or another nation's shores as a Trojan Horse with a nuclear weapons' launch capability, with zero reaction time for dealing with it. Worse, a high-altitude burst causing EMP which isn't intercepted could send the U.S. back to the 1800's in an instant, rendering all of our non-shielded electronics (pretty much anything consumer and business related) useless.

On the personal front, preparing for a nuclear attack is viable, but in the long term not really feasible depending on the level of attack and resulting fallout. Alpha radiation carried by nuclear fallout material is the biggest contaminant factor outside of the immediate blast area (Beta-Gamma radiation is the biggest factor locally, aside from incineration). Though Alpha is easy enough to deal with (it can only harm you if it is ingested into your body via saliva, blood, or into the lungs, and it can be washed off the skin), the contamination to water supplies and ground food sources (vegetation, animals) would ensure that life would be difficult at best for most. Many stockpiles of supplies have been kept for many years by all nations - food, medical supplies, water, etc., but it will never be enough. The U.S. Government has websites that tell you how to plan for an attack that are common sense - batteries, flashlights, radio, non-perishable food, bottled water, etc. for 3 days. Plans still exist on how to build bomb shelters and prepare long-term food stores, ventilation, waste and energy.

In reality, for those of us who have worked with nuclear weapons and have planned for nuclear attacks, preparations for an attack are largely psychological in nature, much like escape equipment is on a submarine. Most submarines operate in depths that are too deep if they sink and would be crushed; likewise, the psychological effect of "preparedness" might make you think you can survive, but in reality living in a post-nuclear attack world would be a lot harder to deal with than most people can prepare for. It reminds me of the old "duck and cover" drills we used to have in school when I was a kid - sure, hiding under your desk is going to save you from the big, bad nuclear explosion. Not.

The plain fact is that the government and civilians can plan, but eventually human nature will take over and anarchy will reign. The recent TV series "Jericho" is a good look into what many experts believe a post-attack world would be like for survivors, sans the political and governmental splitup. For years, there have been plans for governments to survive and communicate with the population in the event of nuclear attack - rest assured you'll probably still have to pay taxes after being nuked.

Just before sunrise (while still dark) on July 16, 1945.

At the peak, about 10000 strategic and 30000 to 40000 tactical. So possibly as many as 50000 total.

The USSR had similar numbers.

ninjas

Aquatech water imaging and technolgy

I guess it's Pakistan.

Yes, of course.

There are two terms in reference to this concept. States with nuclear arsenals are the United States, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, Republic of France, People's Republic of China, State of Israel, Republic of India, and Pakistan. North Korea has detonated warheads, but the existence of an arsenal is unknown. Nuclear capable states often regard those with the knowledge, technology and infrastructure to where they can rapidly design, fabricate, test and deploy a nuclear weapon. These notable states include Japan and Brazil. There are also NATO states in Europe with forward deployed American strategic warheads, making these states defacto nuclear.

The United States' research and development that ultimately led to a successful fission explosion (Manhattan Project and Trinity Test at Alamogordo, New Mexico) was a direct response to scientists' concerns (voiced to President Roosevelt in a letter from Austro-Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, and signed by Albert Einstein) that the Nazis were already conducting researching and development into nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. The United States wasn't the first nation to commit to research and development into nuclear weapons - it was the first to successfully develop, test, and deploy in the field a fission explosive device.

US.

End WW2.