North Korea and other Dilemma of State

North Korea... Fifty years of utter intransigence. I remember an intel brief received once where a briefer told the following. "To show his benevolence the great leader had a bicycle plant built near a village and gave all the villagers a bicycle. This just prior to a tour of the facility by foreign media. The villagers all wore their pins with the picture of the great leader and proudly pushed their new bicycles all over the village. You see the problem was that none of them had ever owned a bicycle and therefore no one knew how to ride. Such is the regime that now is pursuing nuclear weapons. (no secret this has been going on well before the current administration.) Such also is the regime that continually insists on bilateral negotiations with the U.S. That would be just wonderful as far a North Korea is concerned that allows them to pit themselves against the U.S. mano e mano or Kimche y Kimche (whatever the Korean equivalent is) This further allows North Korea to paint themselves as the poor little underdeveloped country trying to come into the modern era but being kept down by that global bully the U.S. Fortunately the state department is wise to this. Nonetheless this arguement has surfaced several times here in Berkeley east and is what I call the playground argument. The logic goes like this. The U.S. has nuclear weapons therefore who are we to tell anyone else they cant have them. In playground terms. Bobby has a stick, so it's not fair that I don't. The fallacy of such arguments can often be uncovered by carrying them to their extreme. So if Bobby has a stick and its only fair then that I also have a stick, shouldn't everyone have a stick? Or in the terms of the global nuclear playground. The U.S. has the bomb, Russia, France, Pakistan and India all have the bomb, Israel may but they aren't telling, besides they don't tend to play well with others anyway. So therefore shouldn't everyone have the bomb? Brilliant idea! I say the U.S. and Russia both reduce our arsenals by selling at fair market price nuclear weapons to anyone who will buy them. But wait that leaves out lesser developed countries who cant afford the weapon. So in the interest of fairness I say the world bank loan those countries the money to procure such weapons. Then the protesters at fill in the city here ______. Can add that to their list of debts to be forgiven.
There the world is now a much fairer place. I feel safer don't you?
So in effect some of the most educated minds I know are in fact arguing for nuclear proliferation. They don't like being told this very much nor do they like it having pointed out that in their disdain for the role the U.S. plays in the world they have fallen victim to fallacious logic.

In other events of note I can now get my car into my garage. No small feat