Well, it's not good is it?
The USA's position is not very strong, being overstretched with Iraq, Afghanistan, and everywhere else they are. I think they'll have to do some negotiating, but Kim Jong Il will know that the USA ain't going to send 10,000 troops over, and if they did what would happen? Another war we get dragged into because Mr [baby] Bush wants to keep all the toys to himself and his mates. Quite hypocritical saying you can't have a nuclear weapon, but I can. And why?? Because they're more responsible??? Give me a break!! I mean America acts like the world police! And who has nominated them for this role? And they wonder why most of the world hates them!
Looking at it from N. Korea's point of view, I can understand why they want nuclear capability. If you had a gun and I wanted to protect myself from you (i.e. not be bullied cos you got the gun and could push me around), I'd get a gun so that, if you shot me, I'd shoot you and we'd both be dead (in the timeframe of launching nuclear ICBM's). Knowing that with my gun, you won't shoot me cos you'll get shot too [lot of shots going about here [

], I'd feel a lot more comfortable about you having one. This is MAD (mutually assured destruction) theory, when a nuke was fired at you, all you'd be able to do before it hit would be to launch one back. And it's this that has kept the world nuclear free since Nagasaki.
IMO nuclear weapons should be illegal under UN/international law or whatever, then the USA and others could credibly disarm states with nuclear weapons. We'd be back to conventional warfare, where manpower and firepower is the big indicator on military strength.
BUT the USA will not give up it's nuclear arsenal and neither will Korea, so it's like who's going to drop their gun first?? No one. So we have to live with the fact that states will have nuclear weapons, but should Korea be allowed to keep it's nuclear capability, expect other states to attain nuclear status. Not good.
So where will we end up? Probably putting sanctions on the whole country, like Iraq in '90, screwing the general population who probably have nothing to do with it, sowing the seeds for more terrorism against the countries involved in sanctioning and possible military action. Then the whole cycle will start again with Iran/Syria and any other state which Bush happens not to like or has some valuble resource (most probably oil!!) within it's territorial boundaries!
Ah well, the way of the West.
P.S sorry for the long post, just got going, then looked up and [

] lol