(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed)  Before the New Year, Anti-Media reported that the Trump administration was weighing a limited tactical strike on North Korea similar to that of the U.S. military’s April strike against the Syrian government.

We’re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

However, not everyone in the Trump administration is particularly happy about the strike proposal, according to Business Insider. From the outlet’s recent report:

“Both The Telegraph and The Wall Street Journal have portrayed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis as trying to caution President Donald Trump against a strike, and the national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, as advocating it.”

As Business Insider notes, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson appeared to change the Trump administration’s stance on North Korea in mid-December, stating that the U.S. was “ready to talk anytime. North Korea would like to talk, and we’re ready to have the first meeting without precondition.”

On the face of it, this would undoubtedly be a much more suitable proposal given no one can predict how North Korea might respond to such a violent abuse of its sovereignty. It is unclear if Russia and China would respond, too, considering both countries are quasi-allies of North Korea. China, in particular, has vested interest in avoiding a spill-over refugee crisis on its own borders (and understandably so).

However, General H.R. McMaster, who also drew up the Syrian April strike proposal to Donald Trump, is much more in favor of a strike against North Korea. McMaster has been saying that the chance of war involving North Korea has been “increasing every day” and went so far as to tell the BBC that the U.S. would “compel the denuclearization of North Korea without the cooperation of that regime.

North Korea and South Korea are currently in the process of holding talks, which may be the real reason behind Washington’s desire to strike North Korea in the near future. There cannot be a peaceful dialogue between the North and South because that would compromise America’s military footprint in the region, as North Korea’s only real demand is that the U.S. put a stop to its military exercises and saber-rattling.

The real issue with North Korea’s nuclear program is not that the despotic regime would ever use it, but that it would reach a level that would render it a sufficient deterrent to prevent future American aggression.

In the meantime, Donald Trump is reportedly a man who once asked three times in a meeting, “If we have nuclear weapons, why don’t we use them?” In response, Tillerson allegedly called Trump a “f*cking moron.”

For all of their flaws, at least there prevails some level of sanity in the White House. One can only hope that Donald Trump does not continue to concede to McMaster’s strike proposals, putting the rest of the world’s global security at risk in the process.