You've changed the argument mid-debate.
Let's assume arguendo that nuclear war is a possibility. Would that be the fault of Donald Trump, as you suggest, or all of the administrations and Congresses prior to this point who failed to do anything about the possibility of a nuclear North Korea?
If you're worried for anyone, be worried for the South Koreans.
Says everyone who has a pet issue that doesn't want to argue the nuts and bolts. I've seen this same line repeated for things like Planned Parenthood funding, concealed carry laws, and a great host of other topics.
It's a very easy way to avoid actually arguing for specific policies in question. Just frame your entire, general stance as morally superior, and skip over the nitty-gritty cost-benefit analysis. It doesn't hold up the even the slightest scrutiny, but it rarely ever gets that far.
Just declare your position as a non-partisan moral one, and move on because, after all, anyone who disagrees and wants to actually talk about specific regulations is a partisan, immoral hack who just wants dirty water and filthy air.