And so it is. However, as long as the consequences of actually using a bucket of instant sunshine, something cheeky in a non-persistent nerve agent or a naughty litte disease on Western targets are clearly understood by everyone and as long as actual delivery of said items in a safe, reliable and accurate manner remains problematic, I would submit that there are plenty of other things to worry about ahead of that.[/b]
Unfortunately one of the biggest drivers for nuclear (or WMD if you like) proliferation is the current US attitude to international relations. If a country has WMDs then the US treat it with a modicum of respect - in deeds if not in words. However, states without WMD just get told BOHICA. Are we going into NK to remove that murderous dictator and his WMD stash ? If Saddam had really had WMDs would we have gone in ?