That does not mean, however, that all anti-USFK complaints are due to that. There sometimes are legitimate complaints about USFK. Other times, though, there is anti-USFK sentiment whipped up by NGOs, press organizations, etc., with an agenda, who are trying to anger the public with selective reporting, innuendo, distorted reports, etc.

“Rather, they are the logical extension of the current ruling coalition?€™s ?¡?°leftist-nationalist?¡?± ideology”

Agreed, but amend to “leftist/nationalist/racist ideology”

On the selling nukes, is the potential for that happening enough to warrant paying the North off for accepting partial compliance and verification?

I believe the North will always keep some nukes on hand hidden in the country, and there is nothing we can do about that short of regime change. And if they kept a slower, easier to hide nuke making program hidden for some years, it would not suprise me if they will try that again even if paid off.

So, the bottom line to me is that North Korea will always have the option of selling nukes if it thinks it can get away with it.

How much material wealth would we have to give them to take their minds off the idea they could make a few millions by selling a nuke? Or more correctly, take their minds off thinking about the cost to benefit ratio of selling nukes?

And I’d also guess selling nukes isn’t just a cash gaining option in the North Korean mindset.

They could decide selling a nuke or two to Iran would be beneficial to NK on several fronts. Iran is a big chunk of NK missile and missile tech sells. But also, Iran can be seen as a thorn in the US’ side. Why not help them be more of a pain in the ass to the US and make it much, much more unlikely the US would invade Iran by giving them a small nuclear deterent?

Again, the risks of getting caught vs the reward is the primary equation, and as long as the North has nukes, that equation will remain in play, and I think NK will always keep a few nukes.