So what is your definition of WMDs anyway?
The definition is :
weapons capable of destroying large areas and/or killing and disabling large segments of the population.
So can't Kamikaze planes filled with explosives be considered WMDs? How about the countless chemical bombs and warfare that Saddam used on his own people and the Kurds in the Gulf War? How about when Hitler used massive amounts of Xyclon B to exterminate 6million jews? How about the fact that terrorists delivered Ricin to a U.S. congressmen, which is a highly contagious, and anthrax, both highly contagious WMDS. The point is, America is hardly the first and last to use WMD's on other countries on civilians, or military. We were at war with an unceding enemy, who attacked us without reason, as we had stated our neutrality already in the war, only breaking it for a while with the Lend Lease Act, supplying Britain with arms. Did the Japanese not torpedo inactive aircraft carriers, killing thousands of soldiers?
Also, don't throw your opinions into the mix just because you have lived in more than 1 country, which is more than most people on this site can say. The fact that you have seen the rest of the world and still come out of it all with the same fucked up naive opinions as the next jackass says that
A) You obviously weren't paying attention to anything in your travels, and
B) You are incredibly easy to persuade, gullible to the point that you'll believe even the most obsurd opinions and
C) Your just plain dumb.
I myself have lived in over 10 countries in 5 continents, and by no means believe any of the shit that you are spewing right now. You need to cut the conspiracy theory victim crap and get down off the cross, use the wood as a bridge and GET OVER IT.