I disagree because china does not always have a higher rate in economy. Yes they have a large economy but the united states economy brings in way more GDP and imports. Also it is incorrect that China's population is smaller than the USA. China has a massive population crushing the US.

The superpower of the future will be the United States, not China.

The winner of the Economy - USA vs China is- CHINA

Despite that the GDP of the United States is higher than China, the United States is more in debt than China. The United States GDP is about 16.77 billion dollars per year, which is higher than China's, 13.4 billion dollars per year. The United States is way larger than China's debt, which could be the end of the United States as a superpower. The USA is 16 billion dollars in debt, which is almost double China’s debt of 863.2 billion dollars. China’s economy also has more exports than the United States. China brings in more money through exports, which helps the economy. China makes 2.21 million dollars per year in exports. The United States only makes 1.57 billion dollars per year. China’s overall costs brought in and the lower amount of debt makes China a better candidate for the superpower of economy.

The winner of the Military - USA vs China is -USA

China’s military personnel has 3,712,500 people working while the United States has 2,363,675 people. Even though the US has less people working for the military, the United States military is still considered Number one in the world. The United States is leading the world because of the large about of weapons and military transportation. The United States total air strength is 13,762 while China only has 2,955. The advanced technology that is used to develop planes, boats, tanks, and other military transportation has pushed the United States ahead in the military race. The United states also has more in its military because the defense budget is bigger. The US defense budget is $587,800,000,000 while China spends $161,700,000,000. The bigger defense budget allows the United States to create a more advanced and more stable military. China does not spend as much on military because military is not China’s main focus.

The winner of the Political - USA vs China is -USA

In order to be the Superpower, a country needs following and influence. Helping other countries is a main way to make an influence. The United States sent out 32.7 billion dollars in financial assistance in a year, which was number one in the world. The UK was second at 19 billion dollars. China did not make it in the top three for helping other countries. China does give out financial assistance but nowhere near as much as the UNited states. The US also had the oldest working national constitution meaning it is a stable government. A key to being a superpower is having a stable country. China’s communist government has always had changes. Though the government in China has become more stable, it is not as advanced as the United States.

The United States will stay the superpower of the world because of the stable country system and the advanced military that continue to help the world.

SOURCES:

https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country id=china

https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country id=united-states-of-america

http://www.indexmundi.com/

I agree that the bombings were necessary. The invasion of Japan would have not been that effective as it would end up killing thousands of Americans and Japanese. The bomb was the only option for President Truman to save his soldiers. If the bombs weren't dropped, more countries might have been involved which would cause even more casualties.

URL

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/no-other-choice-why-truman-dropped-the-atomic-bomb-japan-13504

I agree with Luke that the bomb did end the war. It is very awful that many people died, but more Japanese and more Americans would have died from the invasion of Japan. The invasion of Japan would have happened if the bombs were not dropped. War would have also continued for longer because it took two bombs for Japan to surrender. The United States decided to drop the bomb because they wanted to end the war, not because the United States wanted to kill thousands of people.

URL

http://www.historyextra.com/feature/second-world-war/was-us-justified-dropping-atomic-bombs-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-during-second

The United States did the right thing by dropping bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There was no other choice for the United States at the time. The United States had lost many men in war, and President Truman was pressured to take action. The bomb was an alternate option that saved many soldiers lives because the United States did not have to invade Japan. The Planned invasion would cause thousands of deaths.The United States did not want thousands of Japanese to die from the bomb, but the bomb majorly impacted the war. It took two bombs to make Japan surrender, meaning war would have most likely continued for long after if the bombs were never dropped. The United States did the right thing by dropping a bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

URL

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/30/books/ did-we-need-to-drop-it.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.historyextra.com/article/premium/should-america-have-dropped-atomic-bombs-hiroshima-nagasaki-justified-debate

I agree that North Korea could potentially be very deadly, but the last thing that North Korea wants is war. North Korea has been testing missiles for years, and yes, the missiles are more developed now, but that is just what happens. North Korea would not bomb the United States because North Korea knows the consequences. North Korea would be bombed or attacked by the United States, and Kim Jon-un would lose power. Power is all that Kim Jon-un lives for. Power is what is family lives by, meaning he knows the risk of war.

URL

https://scout.com/military/warrior/Article/What-if-America-Launched-a-Nuclear-Attack-on-North-Korea-109106305

I understand that you know a lot of information about missiles and that your information is more than likely true, but you are talking hypothetically. True if we went to war with North Korea, all of the examples you talk about might happen, but currently, North Korea has shown no such aggression. If North Korea even tried to bomb the United States or an ally of the United States, we would destroy them. Kim Jon-un is smarter than that, and knows what will happen if he starts a war. He will lose power, which is all he wants. Just because more missiles have developed, it does not make war anymore likely.

URL

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/08/worried-north-korea-170822140244266.html

The USA should not be concerned about North Korea and Kim Jon-un for many reasons. Though North Korea has continually threatened the United States, North Korea could not afford war. The already collapsing government of North Korea would be destroyed in a direct conflict between North Korea and the United States. The government has been assisted by China, which is part of the reason the government hasn't collapsed. If North Korea dropped a bomb on the United States, China would likely abandon them because the United States would quickly bomb North Korea back. Also, North Korea may threaten and test bombs for as long as they want, but if Kim Jon-un never actually takes action, his words do not mean anything. Nothing North Korea has done has majorly signaled war, except through threats. North Korea and the United States have thrown threats around for many years. In 1994, the United States came close to war with Pyongyang after the capital city refused to let international inspectors into its nuclear facilities. The United States should not be worried about Kim Jon-un for many reasons.

URL

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40882877

I agree that veto power has the ability to settle disagreements. The veto power creates a need to think deeper into the decision. Veto power keeps the "SC members together and motivates the council to make balanced decisions," According to the RT news. Veto power can stop bad decisions from being made and more agreements to happen. URL

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/193352-un-urkaine-human-rights/

I agree that the UN security council permanent 5 have had power to veto for a long time, but that is no reason for it to stay that way. Other countries that do not have the veto power do not have as much of an influence on votes, which could cause problems. The veto power makes decisions take longer to go through because of the constant conflict of votes, therefore it is a problem. URL

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=36110#.Wd5bIkuGO00