Adaher is right, most of the V2 launch sites were destroyed before Hitler realized it was over.
Also other posters are right in that gas makes a pretty inefective weapon. Thus the great powers could feel good about themselves by banning it while developing weapons that were even more horrific, ie napalm white phospherous (sp?) etc.
The inclusion of chemical weapons as WMD makes the WMD concept pretty incoherent IMHO. Biological and Nuclear weapons can kill 100k plus people in a single use. chemical weapons can’t.
This may be true for the WW1 type gases such as chlorine, mustard gas, and Lewisite, but I expect that a modern nerve gas used in quantity on a large city could easily kill your 100k plus.
Err, those japanese loonies that deployed sarin gas , in the tokyo subway , used roughly about 4 or 5 pounds of Gas , i believe. This was a nerve agent that you refer to , only in probably a terrorist condition, rather than a level four lab certified product , but still only managed to kill about 6 people at most out of over 700 that were on the same platform.
For the same amount of either C4 or Semtex , you could have taken down the whole station and inflicted major damage on the city block.
Post 1960 , the use of bio and chem weapons was never seriously thought of for use against front line troops , the senarios that the soviets had come out with , was to use both weapons on secondary and tertiary targets ,like airfields ,citys , population evacuation routes , to cause the maximum amount of confusion , and to speed up the surrender of the wishy washy allies , while keeping their spoils of war relatively intact.
American use of bio and chem weapons ,was limited to the flexible response doctrine of Robert McNamara and company. The soviets used them , the americans would use them , but other wise chemical warfare was limited to tear gas and other riot agents, mostly by the 80’s the use of nerve , chemical or bio agents on american forces would have resulted in some canned sunshine going off in a city near you, with a nuclear response.
Today , Chemical, nerve and bio agents should have been relegated to the dark ages of warfare , with the newer generation of nukes and precision guided weapons. The cold war was over , all world wide stocks of war agents were thought to be leveling off , with the intention of only keeping a relatively small amount of stock on hand.
But some where , someone thought these would make real dandy poor mans nukes , with the belief that you would get the casualty rate that you spoke of. But the truth is that the amount of casualties that a strike would consist of , is sympathetic casualties from people panicking.
DECLAN: Surely an airburst of a missile containing Che. Bio etc would cause thousands of deaths if said missile was detonated over a densely populated city. You have to remember that these agents are for the most part odourless and that all of them are invisible to the naked eye.
It is my opinion that such a strike would inflict casualties which the emergency services would just not be able to cope with and this itself would cause the panic of which you speak.
There are some practical limitations with using a missile warhead for delivery of chem and bio agents. With chemical and nerve agents ,even in WW1 , it took tons of gas just to kill thousands ,and that was unprepared soldiers.
Wind , rain and topographical features of the target may obscure the delivery. So that if some would be dictator decided to launch a gas attack on London England , the prevailing winds would have to be taken into context ,along with the density of the gas itself ,as its heavier than air. Then you have to release it on such a vector ,that it does not get fouled up in high rise buildings , roofs, just to get to street level.
Dropping a bio weapon is another matter , but so far airborne vectors are the least preferred method for delivering disease laden bugs , most of the time , its preferred to use a waterborne agent.