Little Hawk,

Canada has not developed a nuclear weapon capability because it has never had to because of NATO membership. During the days of the "Cold War", Canada and a good number of other countries sheltered under the American blanket - and a very effective blanket it was too!

In 1950 the UN took action against North Korea for invading South Korea. North Korean forces were expelled from the South and constraints were placed on operations in the North. A truce was arranged that holds to this day - note it's a truce, or ceasefire there was no peace treaty negotiated. North Korea undertook the development of nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, the motive was not to threaten, it was blackmail, which they have been quite successfull with.

In 1991 the UN took action against Iraq for invading Kuwait. Iraqi forces were expelled from Kuwait and constraints were placed limiting the extent of operations inside Iraq. A peace agreement, of sorts, was negotiated with the Iraqi government under the terms of which Iraq was supposed to comply with a number of UNSC Resolutions. Iraq has failed to comply with any, and is currently suspected of re-arming. That re-armament programme includes chemical, biological WMD and developemnt of nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

While increasing contact and trade between North and South Korea will ultimately bring down Kim Il Jong's regime. North Korea is not an aggressor in the same league as Iraq. America does not particularly want to have to deal with a nuclear armed Iraq - I don't believe anyone else in the region, or who has interests in the region, want to do that either. While the two situations may be similar, they are definitiely not the same, and as such require different handling.