A Question to those have miliyary Knowledge?

Question

Suppose if a country Deploys Hydrogen Bombs, then they can do a lot of destruction, the primary reason why they are not depoyed is because damage to environment, dangerous aftermath and radiation fallout which can Damage our Environment extensively.
What I seek to ask is how many Hydrogen Bombs if blown in a specific area (or on our Earth )is it dangerous for people living on other parts of the world
Suppose if Africa was an Empty continent(no population at all)
Suppose if 20 Hydrogen bombs are blown in the area spread out, then would those explosions cause any problems to persons living in Italy or Asia or North America.

Answer 1

Yes they would. Especially using the hydrogen element to amplify the nuclear cascade, it makes a MUCH more powerful explosive yield. This would spread the initial fallout higher into the atmosphere, to be spread further. The tradewinds cross the entire planet, so would also spread fallout across the globe. For example, pollution in China, often becomes pollution in America.
Another factor will be water propogation of nuclear contaminants. Rivers, lakes, oceans etc. spread and flow, so when irradiated....... you see where that's going. It's also not so well advertised that radioactive objects irradiate other objects. A rock, for example that's fiercely radioactive will irradiate other objects. (to an exponentially lower degree)
Think of the effect as heat. A tremendously hot object in africa would heat the air, water, objects, etc. which would heat others, and so on. The effect would lessen the further from the source.

Answer 2

we had this question in physics. that many bombs in the same area could ignite the atmosphere. Unless you can put out the fire, or it goes out on it's own, the planet would have about 2 years of O2 and C02 left in it. bands of people would occupy gas rich environments such as caves and forests, etc, and fight others to the death to maintain control of the gases. this would buy the occupiers about 4 more months of life sustaining gases. Think tanks generally agree that the bunkers scattered around the world in prepation of such a castrophe hold supplies for about 5 million people (most in the USA) for 2-3 years. If science doesn't find an answer, each bunker will eventually become a sarcophagus. very little life would survive, one of which is cock-roaches of many different species (races). they have an exo-skelton, are impervious to radiaton and can adapt to extreme temperatures. they do not require O2 or CO2 to thrive. Over the course of tens of millions of years, cock-roaches would have a gravity bound physique - like ours - develop languages, and ultimately create an industrialized society. at the point, it all starts again, only to eventualy end in a fashion similar that saw our extinction.

Answer 3

First of all, your confusing "Hydrogen" with "Nuclear" weapons. Hydrogen has no fall-out so to speak. Now if the same bombing occured as you had stated in Africa with "Thermo-Nuclear" weapons, it would be world-wide devestation. "Nuclear-Winter", The ones who survived the initial blasts would envy the dead. The blast zone would even kill "Bacteria", no-one on this planet would survive long at all. Within 1 year, all creatures of the earth would perish. that goes for the ocean ones too. No-One wins nuclear conflict. Pray that day never comes to pass. 1st. Sgt., 7th Special Forces, (Ret.) Vietnam, "67"-"70"

Answer 4

I don't see how hydrogen can be damaging to the environment. It's not a radioactive material. Uranium is radioactive and that is used in nuclear fission. If hydrogen fusion were possible at room temperature it would end our energy problems. A hydrogen bomb would only destroy what was close enough to get blown up.

Answer 5

It has been estimated that 500 kilotons is the amount required to trigger "Nuclear Winter"