What to do about North Korea...?

a) Decide, state explicitly and openly, and try to make clear we
really mean that our nation's basic nuclear policy is "No first use,
ever";

We did that. We changed our minds.

The purpose of (a) and (b) is to set a tone, set an example, get morally
aligned with the rest of the world.

For this to actually work, our word needs to be believed and respected
by the world. We have squandered whatever credibility we had and it
won't be coming back in the next fifty years.

d) And finally let it be known, behind the scenes if not openly,
that the implicit corollary of "no first use" is pretty sure to mean,
for us, "more or less guaranteed (and forceful) second use", [...]
as punishment for an "innocent" nation that had let terrorist
elements use their nation as a base for planning or preparing a nuclear
terrorist act carried out against us).

This is a morally repugnant position. It requires such nations to
maintain an equally repugnant repression in their homeland, lest we slay
millions of innocents for the momentary security lapse or acts of a
rogue few. We ourselves could not, and should not, live up to that
standard.

More important, make clear to *all* governments, friend, foe, or just
on the sidelines that it's essential for their own long-term well-being
to control rogue groups who may try to operate within their borders, and
to join in international efforts to control rogue states, rational or
otherwise.

This last point seems to me probably the most important one of all.

How would you propose that the United States do this on its own soil,
while preserving the freedoms we are killing our own children to purport
to export?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.