I think you're forgetting the fatalities from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A major danger of nuclear energy is not the energy generation itself, but the proliferation of nuclear technology and materials.
Do countries like Iran and North Korea have a right to the same energy technology as the rest of the world? I would argue they do. If they shouldn't use nuclear, then the rest of us shouldn't either.
The military potentials of nuclear technology were realized by South Africa. Isreal, and Pakistan without having civilian nuclear power programs. We don't know how much the program to produce fissionable for nuclear weapons cost Isreal or Pakistan, but it is reported that the South African program cost less than $200 million and employed about 150 people.
Neither North Korea, nor Iran have used nuclear weapons. It is not clear that Iran currently is developing nuclear weapons technology. It has denied that it is attempting to build a nuclear bomb. North Korea is capable of producing weapons grade plutonium, but with a reactor that is so small that it probably requires several years to produce enough Pu-239 to build one single bomb.
At any rate neither North Korea nor Iran are converting a civilian nuclear program into a weapons program.
Finally, the post had to do with the relative safety of civilian energy sourses. The evidence demonstrates that nuclear power was shown to be by far the safest energy source of the energy sources studied during the time period covered by the study. This is still true. In addition, nuclear power has proven safer than wind power, and solar voltaics, a fact that anti-nuclear renewables advocates ignore.