06-12-2020, 02:21 PM
Roavin;9806 Wrote:My opinion on the war on NPO is well-documented ("dumb" is the key adjective here), so an Armistice as a starting point sounds good to me in principle, BUT I assume NPO wouldn't even agree to that, precisely because it's so meaningless, and them agreeing to an armistice would be them actually acknowledging any remote threat that just doesn't even exist. So they'll probably counter offer with a NAP as a "take it or leave it" option.
You assume wrongly.
Should there be a preference for ending the war and signing an NAP, that could most likely also be arranged. The situation has changed since the last time this matter was brought up, and while I personally would not back such a decision, should the region wish that rather than the proposed armistice, we will see what we can do. Therefore I ask, do we wish an end to the war and an NAP to conclude it or do we wish to continue the war?