World Background - open war or cold war?


Another anoying newbie question from someone who probably should read the books a bit more.

With regards to the Armageddon War itself, can anyone tell me - are the two protagonists actually "At War" or simply engaging in cold was era mercenary, covert operations, proxy warfare, etc. I assumed that things had escalated completely to open and complete warfare with the War of Brittish Independence, bombing of Brussels and Seattle. However in the closing sections of the main book it implies that a truce/cease fire has been settled and that the USA and EF are now engaging each other through proxy wars in neutral/allied countries with deniable (read mercenary) units staging surgical strikes against enemy resources and assets.

It would seem more likely that a proxy war/cold war setting is more appropriate otherwise some of the IWS reports of EF troops denying actions, etc. would seem irrelevant and it makes no sense why both sides haven't attempted full-scale invasion, bombing, etc.

Anyone able to set me straight on this? And while I am at it, why does the timeline in the introduction section of Earth 2089 only go up to 2087 ? It seems a little silly to completely miss the last 2 years worth of events which would be most critical in establishing the setting, relationships of countries to each other, etc.
I would go with the Cold Relations/ Luke Warm War.
Full scale war and invading another continent is costly in a world with satelite recon, advanced air defences and intercontinental bombers. massing enough transport ships off the shore would be impossible without firts achieving air and space superiority.

For timeline I assume that the last two years have had stagnant relations and fighting at a stalemate. A lot is left open allowing the GM to determine what the status of fighting, troop strength and condition of cities is.

Earth 2089 is all about the political situation.
Yeah I agree with the whole Cold War-starting to turn into a regular war thought. Yes there is a lot of stuff going on but the diplomats have been working overtime, but it looks like time's running out for them.
I would say that there is open war in the UK, and some fairly major engagements between Navies in the Atlantic (although I have not seen any rules for naval conflicts). Likewise the USA's Southern border is seeing a lot of action for your typical cold war.

At the same time there are obviously a number of proxy conflicts occuring around the world, especially in Africa, and the pre-dominance of deniable assets certainly seems to indicate a desire to avoid the expense of a full blown war on both sides, but the rulebook clearly states that the US is on war footing even if martial law has not been declared.

At the current moment it is a war for resources and allies, not of conquest, and thus fits the basic profile for a cold war, but there is a lot of shooting going on in the home territory of both countries, which inclines me to agree with Lane Shutt and lable it as a luke-warm War. It is like trench warfare, except the "trenches" are the oceans, especially since the EF does not want to declare war on Russia.