Well, yes, Iran might have chemical weapons, but chemical weapons can hardly be considered WMDs. See: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/09 ... e_lantern/
Given that the statement 'Iran has WMDs' was immediately followed by pictures of centrifuges (which, I might add, are necessary for peaceful nuclear power) I inferred you were talking about WMDs in the nuclear sense. There is no evidence that Iran is building a nuclear weapon.
In fact Iran is a signatory to the NPT (nuclear non proliferation treaty) and, under the UN conventions, Iran is therefore entitled to build nuclear power plants. Furthermore, under those same conventions the United States, as a UNSC member, is obligated to assist Iran achieve nuclear power safely.
It's the NPT non-signatories the world has to worry about.
Because documents cannot be breached... We all know that Iran has Al-Qaeda cells that have promised to kill 2 million americans, furthermore they have a religious leader proclaiming that when Iran gets a nuclear weapon they will destroy Israel. These are just empty threats, but when you have a middle eastern power being strangled by regulations and is suffering, don't you think that it would only serve to make them more committed and more angry towards Israel and America?
Never the less the NPT cannot be used as a way to say that they cannot have nuclear weapons (I think a long time ago South Africa, a NPT signatory, revealed after the election of a new president, that they did in fact have a nuclear weapons program. I might be wrong however). Its not like documents mean anything when it conflicts with your positions and plans. Lets not forget the previous AND current president of the US have both signed and put in action programs that violate the constitution (Patriot Act, NDAA respectively), the same constitution that they swore to defend and preserve.
America, a country born with dreams of freedom from the oppression of a tyrant, can trample its constitution, the symbol of that freedom.
Yet somehow a country with dreams of completely destroying its enemy, will refrain from doing so because of the signature on a document over 4 decades old?!
I call bullshit.