Three countries were in a race to build the atomic bomb. The US simply managed to get it done before the others. The government not only wanted to build the bombs they also wanted the atomic technology to build atomic energy facilities and nuclear ships. That is why the investment was so crucial. We have long ago reaped back the initial investment. It cost a lot because it was all new and they had to learn how to harvest the plutonium and uranium so it was usable. There is a show about it on Military History channel.
I saw this question before and I hope you mean atom bombs not just atoms. Atoms are in everything in the entire world. Atom Bombs are controversial. Someone from my generation would say there should be no atom bombs, particularly the powerful atom bombs in existence now. Others way we must have them for defense. The problem is there is a cat and mouse game that goes on. One country says I have these bombs. Another says, well we have these bombs and they are better than yours. And it goes on and on. If Josef Stalin had merely forgotten about the bombs there would have been no atom bomb arms race. Many of the bombs have been dismantled but not all of them. People fail to realize there are enough of them to destroy the entire world. So to me they are not helpful. They are the product of two little boys playing the "mine is better game and you better not get a better one."
Bombs have changed so much over 60 years. Atomic bombs are much more powerful than there WW2 counterparts. Smart bombs and tracking bombs are also a new powerful addition.
Atomic bombs use nuclear fission to cause near perpetual chains of reactions. Nuclear warheads (Nukes) just sums up all the different types, including hydrogen bombs (which use nuclear fusion, a much more potent type of power) and atomic bombs. So yes, they are the same.
if the Americans didn't drop the atom bomb it would have needed 1000 American lives so they dropped the atom bomb (fat man and little boy)
While the B29 was expensive it cannot even compare to the real most expensive project of World War 2. The Manhattan Project was the most costly project to develop the atom bombs used in World Wa2. This project cost well over 2 Billion Dollars in the 1940s. That would be like a 20 Billion or so dollars today. So the atom bombs each cost slightly under a billion dollars a piece.
Countries tend to make atom bombs to make a show of strength, so that other countries will think twice before attacking the country with the Atom bomb. This behavior tends to have the opposite effect, making other country build atom bombs so that the appearance of strength is also shown in their country. This is often how war begins.
An atom bomb is a type of nuclear weapon that relies on nuclear fission, while "nuke" is a colloquial term used to refer to any type of nuclear weapon, including both fission and fusion bombs. So, all atom bombs are nukes, but not all nukes are atom bombs.
I saw this question before and I hope you mean atom bombs not just atoms. Atoms are in everything in the entire world. Atom Bombs are controversial. Someone from my generation would say there should be no atom bombs, particularly the powerful atom bombs in existence now. Others way we must have them for defense. The problem is there is a cat and mouse game that goes on. One country says I have these bombs. Another says, well we have these bombs and they are better than yours. And it goes on and on. If Josef Stalin had merely forgotten about the bombs there would have been no atom bomb arms race. Many of the bombs have been dismantled but not all of them. People fail to realize there are enough of them to destroy the entire world. So to me they are not helpful. They are the product of two little boys playing the "mine is better game and you better not get a better one."
Bombs have changed so much over 60 years. Atomic bombs are much more powerful than there WW2 counterparts. Smart bombs and tracking bombs are also a new powerful addition.
Germany and Italy had all ready given up but Japan had not. So to finally end WWII the United States destroyed the Japan citys of Hiroshima and Nagaski with atom bombs (also know as atomic bombs.) finally ending WWII.
I don't really think so because they would cut off our technology supply if we would use it again
Atomic bombs use nuclear fission to cause near perpetual chains of reactions. Nuclear warheads (Nukes) just sums up all the different types, including hydrogen bombs (which use nuclear fusion, a much more potent type of power) and atomic bombs. So yes, they are the same.
So that when you invest money, or give it to someone else to invest for you, you're capable of figuring out how much you should get back, and you don't get cheated.
Because the USSR had nuclear bombs that they were threatening to use on the Americans.
Cherry Bombs arn't really bombs so you dont use them.
If you're reffering to WWII, then we launched two atom bombs(one each) on two of their major cities-Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The loss of life and property damage was so great, it would have cost them too much yen to move on with the war.
If you mean how do you invest in the company, you do so by purchasing Microsoft stock.