"In the end, it really doesn't matter whether they are chemical or not,"

It bloody well does if some complete and utter berk sits down and taps away spouting emotive drivel about people purposely targeting unarmed civilians with chemical weapons

"......they are horrendous weapons, especially when used against civilians,

Psst you clown, ALL WEAPONS are horrendous when used against unarmed civilians, or hadn't you realised that. As I have stated previously there are no NICE ways to die in an armed conflict irrespective of who you are.

"...as they have been regularly and consistently, and they are indicative of how the US has conducted warfare for at least half a century."

Regularly and consistently you say? Not surprising really as neither of these so called "weapons" were proscribed or considered illegal. If any combatant wished to kill their opponents put yourself in their position Jim Lad - are you honestly trying to tell me that your weapons of choice would be a smoke grenade or an aerosol can of weed-killer? If so more fool you, in your position I would choose something that guaranteed the result immediately (not fifty years down the line) and with far greater accuracy.