Originally posted by Devlin0805
Ok if they are still at a state of war, then so is Vietnam and then technically by your definition we were still at war with Iraq and Bush needed no support whatsoever to invade them again, because Desert Storm was too, ended by a cease fire. The Korean War ended with a truce, or cease fire, because the North knew that it could not take the South. They have never signed a peace agreement, but each side signed a non-agression pact in 1991. So, no they are not at war, but they have agreed to disagree about the fate of the nation. Just as Vietnam and Iraq (prior to 2003) have agreed to disagree as both of those wars ended in a cease fire. They are not however still at war.
Vietnam:
Source
We signed the Paris Peace Treay with North Vietnam ending our involvement in the war. South Vietnam surrendered in 1975 ending the Vietnam War. Vietnam never ended in a cease fire agreement, we signed a peace treaty and the former South Vietnamese government surrendered.
Gulf War 1:
We signed a provisional peace treaty and cease fire with Iraq, the peace treaty was conditional on Iraq's compliance with the UN weapons inspectors. We all know how well that went. You can argue we were still at war with Iraq and I would agree to a certain extent. Although now it is a mute point.
Korean War:
source
The US, North Korea, and China signed an armistice and peace treaty ending our involvement in the war. North Korea and South Korea have never signed anything formally ending the Korean War...no armistace, cease fire or peace treaty. A non-aggression pact does not end a war!
Technically the two are at still at war.
You can believe what you want but the facts of the matter clearly show North Korea and South Korea never formally ended the Korean war with each other.