Because he was not suicidal like most terrorists. Had he used them we would have retaliated with NUCLEAR weapons.
Agreed, That is certainly one serious consideration that Saddam and/or his Russian handlers probably thought through.
First, cards on the table - I was convinced that SH had (actual, ready to use) WMD and supported the war. Second, regardless of this debate the allies have done the world a massive favour by removing this POS from power and putting him on trial.
However - I have long since accepted that the whole intelligence community lost the plot somewhere around the millenium and made a judgement then looked for evidence, rather than looking for evidence then making a judgement (the first will alwasy be a self serving cycle - particularly if you throw enough money at it).
Had Saddam have had WMD in any significant quantity he would have used them when we invaded. The war could only end with his loss of power which is the same as his death to a dictator. He didn't and he ended up in a rat hole then facing the hangman.
Had we have given up sanctions, taken our eyes off him, not invaded at some point in the future would he have started building WMD again? Yes. Was he lunatic enough to use them if he did? Yes. Am I therefore loosing sleep over this issue? No.
However, I think war supporters need to be careful over how we debate this issue with non war supporters to win the argument. To doggedly stick to claims that somehow all these WMD were there sounds like tin foil hat stuff now. Yess, we can point to the links of some stuff that looked like it may have been used for WMD, or stuff that was left rotting from the Iran-Iraq war era, but this is not what our intelligence told us was there. The President hit the tone exactly right when he made his speech earlier in the week. We should all follow his example.