<br>I wonder what is most dangerous, Nuclear or Biological
weapons? I know they are almost the same, but I wonder what is more
dangerous. I mean, if you think about, the <a
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sarin-gas-used-in-syria-attack-kerry-says/2013/09/01/4b657cb8-1304-11e3-b18a-e00deecb3b8e_story.html">recent
attack to Syria</a> was clearly through a Biological weapon and
that this weapon is definitely not something that can be taken lightly.
Thus, if you think about it, the accessibility of such a weapon and how
it is not used sparingly makes it more logical to think that the use of
biological weapons are far more dangerous than Nuclear weapons.
</br><br>Sure, sure, all countries considered as great
powers of the world have Nuclear weapons, but they have more biological
weapons at their disposal and all of these they can use whenever they
want. </br><br>So, what exactly is more dangerous?
Biological or nuclear weapons?</br>