Yes, the Chinese military has more people, but the United States has more materials and they have a bigger military budget. This is much more important than people.

Economy: Winner - United States

The United States has a better economy than China. The average income yearly in China is $4,755. In the United States, on the other hand, the average yearly income is $50,756 per year. Many of the Chinese citizens are in poverty and are without jobs. In China, the official unemployment rate is 9.4%. In the United States, the official unemployment rate is 9%. In China, there is 1,300,700,900 person population. That means 122,265,884 people in China are unemployed. In the United States, there is a 323,100,000 person population. That means 29,079,000 people in the United States are unemployed.

Military: Winner - United States

The United States has a better military than China. The United States military budget is 554.2 billion dollars. The military budget in China, though, is 215 billion dollars. The United States' total aircraft is 12,100 and China's total aircraft is 3,729. The USA has 8,848 tanks and China has 9,150 tanks. Compared to the population of people in China's military, the United States has a better tank to person ratio. The lowest age to be in the military in the USA is 17 and in China it is 18.

Political: Winner - United States

China has a communist country and the United States has a constitutional federal republic. A constitutional federal republic is better because the citizens actually get some power and get say to some decisions being made. In the USA, you get to have a citizenship by birth, but in China you do not. You have to gain your foreigner's Certificate for Permanent Residence in the PRC.

Main Source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/

Either way people were going to die. What point are you making if you are just saying that you are going to drop a different kind of bomb. Is the A-bomb killing people still? What does the A-bomb do? How is it better than the bomb the USA dropped?

Yes, we killed 100,000+ people, but if we continued the war without dropping the bomb, the USA and Japan would have suffered many more deaths. The USA did kill many people, but they saved even more people's lives.

The USA did the right thing by dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan would not have surrendered if the bombs had not been dropped. Japan would have produced 1 million Americans killed or wounded if we had not dropped the bomb. As a result of the USA dropping the bombs, less people were killed than if we continued the bloody war. Source:

[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bombing-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-was-the-right-thing-to-do/article/2534007]

There have been many threats against the US and North Korea, but they never result in actions. Words can be said, but it is the actions that we would need to be concerned about. Every example that you pronounced consists of words.

This does make a good point, but where did you get this argument? What is your source?

The USA should not be concerned about North Korea and Kim Jong-un. The first reason is, North Korea just conducted its sixth nuclear test this year, and for the sixth time, it has landed in the ocean. The second reason is, nobody wants war. War only just ends in things being destroyed. The North Korean government's main goal is survival and direct conflict with the US would jeopardize it. Another reason is that what we are seeing is words, not actions. As one anonymous US military official told Reuters news agency back in August: "Just because the rhetoric goes up, doesn't mean our posture changes." President Trump may have threatened North Korea with language uncommon for a US president but this does not mean the US is actively moving on to a war footing. [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40882877]

There should not be veto power. The veto power has caused vital international security issues and multiple crisis. [http://www.peace.ca/securitycouncilveto.htm] One country's objection, rather than the opinions of most of the countries, could change the responses to a crisis. This means that a country could say no to an important decision just because they have a reason to favor the other country being protested against.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnitedNationsSecurityCouncilveto_power]

The veto is a threat to international peace and security, and as many members

propose, should be abolished. [https://www.globalpolicy.org/security-council/security-council-as-an-institution/the-power-of-the-veto-0-40/tables-and-charts-on-the-power-of-the-veto.html]