Of course, Syria's having WMDs depends on what you put in that category.
Chemical warheads ? Well, yes, most probably, for artillery shells or surface to surface missiles. Either they made them themselves - the technology is 100-year old, after all - or they bought the warheads from the Soviets when Russia was heavily involves in the Middle-East. There's the problem of maintenance, as these warheads
Nuclear weapons ? I'll say no. The purpose of these weapons are to be displayed and to signal your enemies their cities could be turned into radioactive rubble any day. Given the ongoing conflict between Syria and Israel, Syria would have publicized the weapons to use it in negotiations.
That leaves us with biological warheads, and we know that Syria is among the few countries that are doing research on military-grade virus strains. But then again, if Syria really has something in store and wants to use it in negotiations, I find it strange they did not boast the weapons, especially since there's a ongoing threat of US invasion.
If you were Syria, and if you were willing to buy some time both to survive and to engage the negotiations, wouldn't you show to the other players you're not bluffing ?
Your points are well taken. However I dont think we can analyze the Middle East the same way we analyze the rest of the world. The countries surrounding Israel have invaded them without warning in the past. Many of Israel's neighbors have sworn 'death to Israel'. They are under constant suicide attack. Israel is also the only nuclear country in the world that has had ballistic missiles fired at it while it possessed nuclear weapons. The only reason Israel did not retaliate and nuke Saddam during Gulf War I was due to restraints placed on it from the coalition. Do you think if ballistic missiles were launched from Russia to the US that we would sit back and send scientist to the impact areas to look for signs of WMD ? No we would not. We would launch retaliation before the Russian missiles reached their apex. Israel has already shown it will strike first to prevent their neighbors from becomming nuclear. So it is clear that no one in the Middle East can pound their chests and say they have acquired nuclear weapons if they actually have. Israel would instantly try to destroy the nuclear capability with a first strike. Judging by their past behavior, we would probably realize that one of these middle eastern countries was about to go nuclear by examining the aftermath of the Israeli strikes. Chemical weapons are another story. A launching of chemical weapons can be survived and Israel is the best equipped country on the planet for surviving such an attack. No one in their right state of mind would fire chemicals at Israel without expecting retalitory nuclear annihilation. The remaining threats are biological and dirty nuclear. If the radical Islamic terrorists are going to utilize WMD on Israel, Western Europe Southern Russia or the US coalition, it will probably be biological or dirty nukes.
France really needs to start worrying. The Chirac and Saddam deal was much like Hitler and Stalins. Now that Saddam is gone, there is nothing France can do for the radical Islamic Front. Taking over the French Government along with its nuclear capabilities is the best option radical Islam has. The Russians have shown the capability to defend their home turf. France has not.