He wanted to use Atomic bombs against North Korea, but President Truman wouldn't let him.
General MacArthur wanted nothing short of total war. He proposed to conquer North Korea, then push into China and use Nuclear Weapons to subdue resistance. This would have very likely drawn the USSR into the war, and could have escalated into a nuclear exchange.
Douglas MacArthur was awarded the Medal of Honor for his leadership during World War II, particularly for his role in the Philippines and his strategic planning in the Pacific Theater. Many argue that his bold decisions and resilience in the face of adversity justified the honor. However, others criticize his controversial tactics and decisions during the Korean War, raising questions about his overall legacy. Ultimately, whether he was deserving of the Medal of Honor is subjective and depends on one's perspective on military leadership and achievement.
Out of these two options, the former would be the better option. Because the sentence has the present tense of argue rather than the past tense, "argued", it would be appropriate to match it with the present tense verb of "is".
The general opinion is that it originated in Japan although some people argue it started in China then Japan.
Why does it matter that the couple is gay? Couples argue in general. Why do people disagree? Why do people like different things? To argue is natural and couples need to work things out and discuss things, regardless of gay or not.
That probably is a true statement. Some people argue that the conflict in Korea was not an officially declared war. In any event, yes, the US military fought there.
Argue about what. Be more specific.
to argue = hitvake'akh (??????)
Don't argue; dicker. I won't argue the point.
If you want to argue for the lions, you talk about their coordinated efforts, general strategies, etc. If you want to talk about the cheetah, you can talk about their physical might (speed, endurance, etc.). I think if you want to argue for the lions, you argue that they are the more intelligent and therefore the more /skilled/ hunter, while if you want to argue for the cheetah, you argue that they are /physically/ stronger than a lion. Though, I'm not sure if this is a very scientific approach... Maybe if you bolster your case with statistics and the size of the animals the lion/cheetah hunt in relation to its own size? :D
"Please do not argue with your brother," the mother said to one of her sons. A tendecy to argue is an annoying trait to have. When you argue, you are just wasting time.
The adjective for "argue" is "argumentative."