Why doesn't Iran have a chemical weapons program? Why is it always nook-nook-nook. Chems are alot cheaper, alot harder to get rid of or deny, and if they were serious they could've been depopulating their opponent with hundreds of thousands or millions per year. Plus the real horror of it.
DRONES could deliver this shit.
You mean to tell me they have NO vx or novachok?

>>508370488 (OP)
> Why doesn't Iran have a chemical weapons program
They will have when troops are on the ground

>>508370701
just saying if you wanted to gas jews, why don't they literally have the gas to lobb into tel aviv or jerusalem

>>508370488 (OP)

Not a reliable deterrent as you would need a lot for any semblance of MAD as well as terrible as an offensive weapon due to horrible optics and a low chance to eliminate vital military targets (not even mentioning that it is incapable of destroying equipment, best case it hits some soldiers with their gas masks down).

>>508372328
Biological would be better than chemical. China tried and failed. I don't think Iran could do better.

>>508370488 (OP)
Chemical weapons do not destroy infrastructure. The sad truth is that our leaders don’t care about how many peasants die, when you can just import new ones.