> On one side it is clear that no country should give up their WMD projects.

That sounds insane. I don't think world would be more peaceful if every country under every government had WMDs. We'd be in the middle of nuclear winter now if that was the case. You could draw analogies to everyone owning a gun. We know it just ends up with many more dead and nothing being more peaceful.

> Since you name NK that's a clear example of a country having nuclear deterrent actually saving the region from a conflict.

He's wrong. What protects North Korea is that it's poor, has no natural resources and devastated human capital and neither attacks anyone with terrorist attacks nor credibly prophesies their intent to kill any nation or ethnicity.

If they did that, they'd be steamrolled already. WMDs or not.