So until they explode one out side of their own domain it should not be anyones business
If it were anything other than WMDs and/or their delivery systems, I would whole-heartedly agree with you on this point. Unfortunately, the US and other countries know full-well what even a small nuclear weapon can do, the devastation and turmoil such a device can bring to the world stage. While chemical and biological systems aren't anything to be trifled with either, their limited area effects tend to make them seem not as pressing to deal with as nuclear weapons; I think this is likely also why so-called "rogue" countries seek to acquire nuclear weapons instead of those other, relatively simpler systems. Unfortunately, the world has, for a long time, not been privy (outside of maybe a computer screen) to the true destructive potential of nuclear weapons. I honestly think that for all the supposed good the test ban treaties accomplished, the fact that since the ban has kept younger generations (especially of those in charge militarily and politically) from honestly knowing the true "power and destruction" a nuclear weapon can deliver, these same people, I think, have become complacent towards their use. I fear that this complacency will ultimately lead to another deliberate usage of such weapons. These are devices which should have signaled to the human race that we now had the capability to virtually wipe ourselves off the planet (as well as a good chunk of the ecosystem). To a certain extent, it did. But that memory and knowledge seems to be fading quickly.
We had better hope that the next usage of such a weapon is only a low-yield (or even high yield) nuclear device; we are rapidly approaching the ability to create a weapons technology which could be even more devastating to humanity, if not the planet itself (anti-matter and nanomachines are two near-term - 50-100 years, perhaps sooner - technologies in this regard). Sadly, it seems, we as a species really aren't socially evolved enough to be wielding nuclear weapons, let alone anything in the future.
Our path for survival is narrow and treacherous; I think many see this and/or know it nearly instinctively, which is why they seek to limit proliferation of the technology by any means possible. At the same time, we know that Pandora's box can't be closed. Perhaps it is hoped that we can keep things stable enough for a long enough time until that needed social evolution occurs; I tend to doubt it will ever occur, though - one would think we would have figured it out after WW2 (or Korea, or Vietnam, or Iraq, or...?), but it doesn't seem that way.
I still often wonder what might have been had the United States not squandered the money it has on the current wars in the Middle East, and instead had invested all that money on a combination of better K-12 education with a focus on science, logic, mathematics, reasoning, and rationality, coupled with programs to initiate a "Manhattan"-scale project devoted to exploring, creating, and expanding alternative (and nuclear) energy projects across the country (while pulling back on our "world police presence" military-wise in the ME and elsewhere). Maybe instead of the world quagmire that all of this has ultimately caused, we would instead be prosperous, continued to have a surplus, and we would have an export the world wanted. I don't think we can ever "get off of oil" - but for most fuel purposes, there are viable alternatives (also - a lot of the alternative would be a lot more viable if we all didn't insist on having big, fast, and powerful vehicles - most of that isn't necessary for most people).
Don't get me wrong - this isn't a "Republican vs Democrat" thing, either (from a US perspective) - its our entire polarized society that is ultimately at fault. We don't make education the priority in this country; we cut science, maths and the arts in favor of sports and standardized testing. We force "teaching to the test", instead of actual critical thinking and logic skills that would better our country (likely because if we did that, it would lead to a population that would challenge the status-quo come election time - and we can't have that, can we?). We seemingly care more about superstition and mythology, than on reality, rationality and facts. Indeed, we seemingly care more about what a particular inception of a mythologized all-powerful father figure seems to care about what is going on between two or more consenting adults do in their bedroom, than we do about solving the hard, reality-based problems. Indeed, we fight over the very supposed sacred "books" and traditions, saying one is right and the other wrong, and fight, fight, fight; never stopping to think like an adult rationally about the situation.
Sometimes I feel we'll never get out of this mess, that the inmates are running the asylum and have been for centuries, and our species will likely bear the brunt of devastation because of it in the end...