What about the high concentrations of mustard gas and cyanide we found in the Euphrates? There is plenty of evidence, but because we didn't find 10 tons of each fully mixed WMD properly labeled in 6 inch letters, nothing seems to count. As we see, they didn't need actual sarin, only the precursors, which people also won't accept as proof -- or rather the media doesn't.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-04-04-iraq-white-vials_x.htm
Marines reportedly find cyanide, mustard agents in Euphrates
From staff and wire reports
Marine units testing drinking water found cyanide and mustard agents in the Euphrates River, MSNBC reported, as concerns mounted that Iraq would resort to chemical weapons as coalition troops closed on Baghdad.
Evidence for what? The point was not that Iraq had chemical weapons at one time, or that there were odds and ends lying around, the point was they were thought to still have a militarily significant amount that was already weaponised.
It's the distinction between having steel bar stock, charcoal, sulfur, and potassium nitrate, or having rifles and rounds (well, black powder round anyway. and yes, you'd need a priming compound, etc.) Who knows- we may still find such a stockpile- but I doubt it, and I doubt any troops will be killed or injured by them either. And frankly, I think that's a good thing.
I'm not suggesting the WMD claims were lies- I think they were honest estimates...that turned out not to be accurate.