*HYP* Resolution 2011/03 - Ending the invasion of North Korea

Original post by terza021

ooc: technically war did not have to be declared because they were only in army stance for all these years (since last war) and army stance can be broken without declaration of war. And since now we should be smarter than last time (and since this is not real world) we should arrange full peace this time.

that doesn't even make sense.

Reply 42

Original post by Ethereal

that doesn't even make sense.

Meaning xD

Reply 43

Original post by terza021

Meaning xD

I don't understand what you were trying to say.

Reply 44

Original post by Ethereal

I don't understand what you were trying to say.

Sry I misspelled army stance=Armistice

Reply 45

But Japan, Argentina and North Korea haven't been in a state of war?

Reply 46

No but they did military interfere in the conflict and since peace should be signed between North and South it would be good for those countries to participate. Also this peace talks were set up to stop the war between North and South Korea and it is still to be decided wether or not those countries should participate (I of course say they should).

Reply 47

Rakas21

21

War was declared.

Argentina declared war on both North Korea and Myanmar (admitedly a little posturing), however both nations declared war back and on several occasions threatened nuclear action. Myanmar has since withdrew after suffering heavy losses from Argentina and North Korea and Argentina agreed to a ceasefire.

Japan and North Korea could certainly be described as being at war given that Japan was enacting full scale war plans.

Peace talks need to go ahead to resolve the conflict between North and South Korea. Given that Japan is withdrawing (is that immediate?), Argentina will leave North Korea if the international community so wishes during the peace talks.

Reply 48

Where was the formal delcaration? :confused:

Reply 49

I once again say these talks are to create peace between North and South it is still to be determined wether rest are going to participate. I think that they should because if not any country can continue invading DPRK and say that they are not bound by any contract. Also if one country has troops in other country and they are fighting that that consider to be formal declaration of war. In your point of view (as far as I got it) if one country invades another without declaration of war it is not war and there should not be peace talks. Also it is kind a wrong to me that you want to put in danger peace in this part of the war by denying the right of peace talks by a simple technicality. And in the same time seems to me that you do not want to create long lasting peace (not only armistice) that these two countries newer had in their sovereign history.

Reply 50

Rakas21

21

What formal declaration were we meant to give.

I personally said that Argentina officially declares war on North Korea and Myanmar. I did not feel it nessesary to create a resolution given that it was an illegal war backed only by Japan and Argentina along with potentially a few neutral nations.

Reply 51

Original post by Rakas21

What formal declaration were we meant to give.

I personally said that Argentina officially declares war on North Korea and Myanmar. I did not feel it nessesary to create a resolution given that it was an illegal war backed only by Japan and Argentina along with potentially a few neutral nations.

So if it was an illegal war, you'll be submitting to the ICC Then

Reply 52