Calculate Price

Total

Sample Questions

Sample questions

Get a 10%  discount on order above $ 10
Use the following coupon code :

MASTERPIECE2020

persuasive essay

Editorial Essay Assignment                                                

The purpose of this essay is to persuade the reader to agree with your stance
on a publically debated issue. It’s a simple goal, but a complex research and
writing process.

Because the issue is publically debated, you will need to understand the
debate’s history, and you will need an understanding of the various views on
the issue. Readers have biases, backgrounds, emotions, and they are motivated
by diverse things, so it’s important to consider why people believe what they
believe. You should judiciously employ emotive language (pathos), use strong,
sound and valid logic (logos), and you should point out gaps and errors in
logic used by previous editorials/arguments on the issue (ethos). All of this
must be accomplished within approximately 850 words (no fewer than 700 or more
than 1000 will be accepted), so every explanation, every example, every
sentence, needs to serve a purpose.

Start with an issue that interests you. Research it online–the New York Times,
Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Sacramento Bee have useful
websites. Any textual genre is appropriate for your research–like op-eds,
letters, cartoons, blogs and video blogs–but only actual editorials–full
articles or columns at least 700 words–should be considered as models. Bear in
mind that some issues have a long history and some are new. For instance, if
the issue is based on new legislation, be sure there are enough editorials to
constitute a history; conversely, if the issue is ongoing, like the evaluation
of the Iraq war, be sure there aren’t so many editorials that your research
becomes endless.

Unlike typical editorials, this requires a Works Cited sheet. Unlike typical
academic essays, this does not require in-text or parenthetical citations.
Instead, name sources using signal phrases. Editorials assume familiarity with
the topic on the reader’s part, diminishing the need for textual referents.

Answer

Title: Should America
invade North Korea

Name:

Institution:

Date of submission:

Introduction

North
Korea has been making claims of attacking South Korea and United States. In the
past, North Korea has kept its promise through sparking of the Korean War which
at that time, North Korea was backed up by china. However, this time through
its leader Kim Jong-un has threatened to use nuclear weapons in their attack
which comes just after a nuclear test done for the third time which prompted sanctions
on the country.

Taking
into consideration these facts, it is not easy to dismiss articulations made by
North Korea to threaten the world’s peace through a nuclear missile attack and
especially to a world super power like United States. Therefore, United States
should result into a calculated attack on Korea to avoid any later damages and
fatalisms if North Korea makes good of its pronunciations (Farrah 1).

North
Korea has proclaimed that it has nuclear missiles and their completion is
destined to hit specific cities in United States. In their announcement, they
identified Washington, D. C, Los Angeles and Texas but with no clear reasons of
their aim to destroy United States. However, Washington has not reacted to
these claims with the belief that the best way to go about this is through
negotiations to freedom and security (Farrah 1). Washington accepts
that they should follow the rules of engagement that have been established by
the lesser nations. On the contrary, I tend to differ with this notion and
suggest that United States should defend itself from any acts of terror that are
likely to threaten the world’s peace. United States should use its status as
the world’s super-power to stop the threat by North Korea on United States.

Though
use of war is a bad idea, unfortunately that’s the only best solution in this case.
North Korea has been a defensive nation since the end of the Korean War with
their leaders mistreating their own people especially with the sanctions
induced on it. War actually will help liberate North Korean people from the
tyranny of Kim Jong-un.

United
states should mainly concentrate on overthrowing  the leader of north Korea Kim Jong-un who has
really aided the terrorist Islam jihads in bombing united states with Mr. Kim
will surrender (as  the saying goes, “cut
off the head of a snake and the body dies” ). However, intelligence at the
white house suggests that to do this, china’s help is required. The overthrow
also benefits North Koreans who starved and most imprisoned under the
dictatorship of Mr. Kim.

Once
a calculated threat to national interests of America is launched, the best
option available is for the country to respond to the threat early enough to
avoid any regrets (Surico). In this case, the missile
that North Korea has identified to be purposely for United States should be
destroyed on the ground before its launch. 
United States should try to make the launcher of the missile inoperable
to avoid any risks to the United States citizens. Thanks to the satellite
inspection on the nuclear activities in North Korea, the missile can be hit before
its launch to avoid any civilians from getting into danger.

Furthermore,
an attack on North Korea could be used as a tactical advantage to avoid any
threats that it gets from other nations. In particular, this attack would
discourage the Mullahs in Tehran from continued threats North Korea would seen
by the government as a provocation.

The
president should therefore clearly state the attack on North Korea is an act of
self defense rather than a random attack on a country. The attack should be a
reaction to the threats of North Korea and this should be regarded as a fully
loaded weapon aimed directly at the heart of United States. The actions to be
taken however, must have the approval of the neighbors explaining in detail the
purpose of the attack with a disclaimer of no harm shall happen to the
civilians. The sole purpose of the attack should be to clear the present danger
rather than bringing a regime of change in the country (Suri 1).

Surico,
p. 1 identifies that leaving North Korea to continue in its threats will put in
danger the frail economies of the region and this will encourage other
countries in the region to build their own nuclear weapons in an attempt to
match the weapons in order to secure their borders. In addition, other isolated
states in the world will follow in the footsteps of North Korea with countries
like Iran watching closely the developments of the threats by North Korea to
the United States.

Suri, p. 1 Quotes the words of China’s
president on the issue of threats to United States and its allies. In his view
Xi Jinping, the Chinese president said that there should be no one threatening
the world’s or region’s peace through chaos for personal gains. Through
elimination of North Korean threats, United States will reduce the threat
caused by North Korean weapon store, give a reassurance to those in the region
and ones watching all over the world that America and its allies will not be
blackmailed with missile launch threats.

References

Farrah, Joseph. “What US Should do About North
Korea.” WND commentary 2 May 2013.

Suri, Jeremy. “Bomb North Korea, Before Its’s Too
Late.” New York Times 12 April 2013: 1.

Surico, John. “Austin professor thinks we should bomb
North Korea Riight Know.” New York times 4 April 2013.