Carla Hunt wrote: > would it be accurate to say that "nuclear weapons" are more a > catagory and "atomic weapons" are a type of weapon in that catagory? I wouldn't say that. "Atomic weapons" is simply an older term for "nuclear weapons". When that expression was in wide use, the weapon being referred to was a fusion bomb. At about the time when the fission bomb (thermonuclear bomb) came into being, the press started referring replacing all references to "atomic" with regards to weapons and power plants with "nuclear".