Non-critical look at proliferation

The documentary basically was split into two parts: a poor history of nuclear proliferation (and ways in which this has been irresponsibly managed), and then some kind of 'lets make a change' montage.

Ignoring the second part for obvious reasons, the first part was dangerously poor film making. It sent a blatant message of fear regarding the mismanagement of nuclear weapons. This in itself isn't necessarily bad - nuclear weapons are quite dangerous things. However, fear was created through a very 'American lens'; i.e. an enemy (those Arabs) are after us (and as to why we'll leave this blank for you to fill in).
For example, the film used the example of Pakistan's nuclear proliferation being dangerous as it will then have a domino effect of other dangerous states proliferating by feeling threatened - i.e. Iran, Saudi Arabia etc. This blatantly ignored Isreal's proliferation as being negative for the same reason. And more so, the US's proliferation (who gives Isreal the largest aid, and military aid of any other nation).
Of course, the film's message was that nuclear proliferation was bad (including the US), but very importantly, excluded to explain the nuclear threats without explaining the US's large role in other nation's motivations and abilities to proliferate. This framing to the film is dangerous and non-critical.

As to North Korea, here's a quote from Noam Chomsky:
"But actually, I think the problem with North Korea is in fact what they're saying: the wrong guys are getting possible power, nuclear weapons. Look, nobody in their right mind would want North Korea to have nuclear weapons. But on the other hand, there's nothing much that they would do with nuclear weapons if they had them, except maybe defend themselves from attack. They're certainly not going to invade anybody, that's not even imaginable: if they ever made a move, the country gets destroyed tomorrow. So the only role that nuclear weapons could play for them is as a deterrent to attack-and that's not totally unrealistic.
I mean, it's a pretty crazy country, and there's not very much good-there's nothing good you can say about the government. But no matter who they were, if they were Mahatma Gandhi, they would be worried about a possible attack. I mean, the United States was threatening North Korea with nuclear weapons at least as late as the 1960s.(62) And after all, just remember what we did to that country-it was absolutely flattened. Here people may not be aware of what we did to them, but they certainly know it well enough.
As far as Western concern about nuclear weapons goes, obviously it's highly selective-like, nobody cares that the United States has nuclear weapons, nobody cares that Israel has nuclear weapons, they just don't want them in the hands of people we don't control, like North Korea. And I think that's really the main issue behind the controversy these days."