So Iran has the know-how to make WMDs (See http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE59228E20091003)

Does it matter?

I would prefer a world in which Khameni & Co did not possess nukes; but I doubt they'll ever use them. To do so would be to court their own destruction. Corrupt Ayatollahs may be happy to send young kids on suicide missions but I think they draw the line at having their own backsides vaporised. WMDs may be nice toys but they are unlikely to be USED.

More interesting is the spread of the technology to make smart bombs, precision guided munitions and other "weapons of pinpoint destruction" or WPD.

In the 1980s the CIA supplied the Afghan Mujahedin fighting the Soviets with stinger guided anti-aircraft missiles.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger

The stinger helped the Mujahedin win the war which probably hastened the collapse of the Soviet Union.

By today's standards the stinger was primitive. Today Western and western armed forces are able to pick off individuals from drone aircraft. The leader of the Pakistani Taleban, Baitullah Mehsud, was killed by such an American drone strike.

However the technology to manufacture WPDs is spreading. Long before terrorist organisations possess WMDs they are likely to acquire WPDs.

Consider some specifics. Hizbullah and Hamas have rained thousand of rockets on Israel. Most of these have done little damage. Hizbullah and Hamas had the munitions but lacked the precision guidance systems.

Suppose the two organisations acquire the capability of pin-point targeting. Instead of most missiles landing harmlessly in fields they could be aimed at factories, oil refineries, administrative buildings and the Parliament building.

Suppose the Taleban in Afghanistan were able to target US bases or destroy US aircraft? Suppose the Pakistan Taleban acquired the capability of targeting the Pakistani Army's prepared positions.

Unlike WMDs, WPDs are USED. Countries such as Iran have the technology to develop them and put them in the hands of its proxies. They are relatively cheap to manufacture.

WPDs are a bigger issue than WMDs.

And then there's robosnake:

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3uGAvbM9eo

A few additional points

I have always been sceptical of the ability of terrorist organisations to develop nukes. But developing WPDs is almost within reach of hobbyists. Here are some additional scenarios:

--A "white militia" group develops a missile capable of shooting down the Marine One helicopter as it lands on the White House Lawn.

--Later such militia groups could develop a missile capable of homing in on the oval office windows.

--Imagine how the civil war in Sri Lanka may have played out had the Tamil Tigers possessed WPDs?

--Robosnakes will certainly be within the capabilities of hobbyists within a few years. How do we defend against swarms of robosnakes armed with C4?

--Current robots are not entirely autonomous. In future they will be. Imagine a swarm of robosnakes that are able to operate autonomously. If you think this is sci fi consider the "urban challenge" competition conducted by the US Defence Advanced Research Proejcts Agency (DARPA)

http://www.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/index.asp

Consider also a US global hawk flying autonomously across the Pacific.

http://www.spacewar.com/news/uav-01d.html

That was back in 2001! Almost pre-historic in the rapidly developing world of robotics.

As computer power becomes cheaper and more accessible, and as the knowledge base for programming autonomous robots grows, terrorist organisations will develop the capability to deploy small autonomous "robo-bombs".

Of course I wouldn't entirely rule out non-nuclear WMDs. Imagine if the London 7/7 bombers had released saran gas instead of relatively small explosives.

Steven,
Just so I'm sure what 'jocular speculations' am I responding to this time, please choose one of the following.
- Muslim terrorists under our beds (with WPDs)?
- General military weapon hysteria. A subset of the Chicken Little Proclamation?
- Or Steven Myers personal one man propaganda justification for Israel's over the top response sale (at a middle east near you)??

I'm a little confused, in one sentence you point out that the H&H rockets (not Palestinians)fall harmlessly in fields. Does this mean that you agree that Israel's response is disproportionate? Surely not.

One could argue that if the H&H did get that technology it might even up the odds a bit.Could this mean a mini MAD might exist and therefore meaningful negotiations, as equals might happen?.....nah!

Aren't the Israeli's using this technology now?

If Israel were to get this technology first does that mean that collateral damage and excesses might decrease? Nah! They'd just target the Palestinian community utilities, hospitals, schools and UN compounds. Of course there are those pesky 'unarmed peace nuts. And who cares if a few innocents die anyway.

Maybe the US can invent a mini exploding flying bomb that can seek out and able to differentiate between collateral damage and the bad guy (psst he's the one in the black hat).

We all know that Israel's response will be consistent, over the top, indiscriminate and escalated. So Steven, What do you want us to respond to?

Adendum,
I think the other fields are their look out there is no limitation in war...everyone is at risk of being killed.
Oh yes most importantly
Are these responses 'jocular' enough?

Dear old stevenlmeyer - as ever, the wannabe Michael Crichton of OLO.

Seriously Steven, you should organise some of the crap you post here into a pulp sci-fi/speculative fiction novel.

If you improve your diction and grammar - not to mention finding some kind of plot - there's every possibility that if you keep on plugging away some populist publisher might actually pay you for your efforts.

fuc the zionist/robo snake

iran got metal storm
one million rounds PER MINUTE

http://www.google.com.au/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=gd&q=metal+storm+one+million+rounds+per+minute&hl=en-GB&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB