THe term Chemical weapon defines something for what it IS, not what it is capable of. That does not make all Chemical Weapons WMD. The term WMD defines a weapon for what its capable of doing, namely causing massive destruction!
I agree with this rather simplistic view, however, with regard to the legality and possession of WMD's by dictators and others who are not supposed to have WMD's, and according to the UN, the CWC and GC, stipulate clear parameters around intent of original purpose of the weapon... A Sarin bomb is a WMD because it was produced to be a WMD, and any speculative analysis as to the potential destruction any given warhead could produce after a certain period of time, is irrelevant. Sarin bombs are inanimate objects, and thus, incapable of any action whatsoever, so I submit it's not wise to establish parameters based on the weapon's capability, rather the intended purpose of the producer or possessor.
This is why the UN saw fit to establish the CWC, to address the growing technological threat of chemical weapons, which the Geneva Convention failed to articulate in specific detail. The CWC classified potential chemicals into several categories, or "schedules." Some chemicals can be used for different things, other than producing WMD's, and they are classified as Schedule 2 or 3 chemicals, some chemicals used to produce WMD's are found in fertilizers or agricultural use, and are classified as Schedule 4 chemicals. AND... There are several specific chemicals, which are only used for WMD production, they have virtually no other purpose, except for use in a WMD... they are Schedule 1 chemicals. Sarin, is the first chemical listed in Schedule 1.
Another point would be, the subjective nature of the term, "Mass Destruction". I think we can agree, Care4All and Osama BinLaden, probably have differing views on what would be "mass destruction." I presented an analogy that is reasonable, concerning the chaos it would cause in America, if 10 degraded Sarin bombs exploded in schools and malls, and asked you if you thought it would be considered an attack with WMD's? So, the Sarin bombs found in Iraq, might not be capable of their original intent, it doesn't mean they are no longer WMD's.
The thing that's important to remember is, Iraq signed the CWC treaty, and was not supposed to have Sarin, or any of the precursors to make Sarin, or empty shells to fill with Sarin. These WMD's are not important because of the damage or danger they pose now, they are important because they illustrate why we couldn't allow Saddam to remain in power. These weapons did not exist, according to Saddam, he had destroyed them all... or Clinton had destroyed them with his bombing runs... whatever. They weren't supposed to be there! They WERE!
