I fully agree with the Armchair Generalist: it's an unjustified leap of faith to assume that terrorist organizations will inevitably try to acquire biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons:
We know that people can buy lab equipment and set up small scale production capable of producing BW agents. And yet... no earth-shattering kaboom.
To avoid repeating myself, here's what I've already written on this subject. I'll add a small coda: in some cases, terrorist groups may want to create the impression that they're about to get some kind of unconventional weapon, even if they're really not doing that. The bluff is cheaper than the actual program, and in some contexts, just as effective.
On the other hand, the bluff can also backfire. Since terrorists have brains, they do think through the pros and cons of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, for real, or as a bluff. Terrorist groups have internal arguments about this topic, and official policy can swing one way or the other.
It's a mistake to assume that, just because a scary weapon exists, terrorists will pursue it with an ant-like intensity and mindlessness. The possibility exists, but the probability is lower than most people think.
Comments