The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


SBAs and territory

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Lordo » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:05 pm

Maximus wrote:
Lordo wrote:for once we agree. no state can separate without the permission of the other. as to the sba land, the village lands are all marked. the property should go back to the village it belonged to and to the actual people or their relatives that owned them originally.


The same thing should happen with all land stolen north of the green line. It should go back to the village and to the actual people or their relatives that owned then originally. The thieves and squatters that currently occupy should accept this and remove themselves from the problem so there can be a just and fair solution.

if i needed to converse with brainwashed fanatics i would go to their forum.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11518
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Maximus » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:11 pm

Lordo wrote:
Maximus wrote:
Lordo wrote:for once we agree. no state can separate without the permission of the other. as to the sba land, the village lands are all marked. the property should go back to the village it belonged to and to the actual people or their relatives that owned them originally.


The same thing should happen with all land stolen north of the green line. It should go back to the village and to the actual people or their relatives that owned then originally. The thieves and squatters that currently occupy should accept this and remove themselves from the problem so there can be a just and fair solution.

if i needed to converse with brainwashed fanatics i would go to their forum.


You say that the SBA land should be returned to the original owners but then you should retain what you have stolen.

Hypocrite, why are you on this forum in the first place?
Maximus
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4274
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Flying Horse » Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:02 pm

Maximus wrote:
Lordo wrote:for once we agree. no state can separate without the permission of the other. as to the sba land, the village lands are all marked. the property should go back to the village it belonged to and to the actual people or their relatives that owned them originally.


The same thing should happen with all land stolen north of the green line. It should go back to the village and to the actual people or their relatives that owned then originally. The thieves and squatters that currently occupy should accept this and remove themselves from the problem so there can be a just and fair solution.


Our land should be returned to us, the actual owners. I aren't keen on this two state crap. People own land, it should go back to them, regardless where it is, but that's just me. If you have papers to prove it, it should go to you, plain and simple. I'd like to know what they will do for those that own land currently being literally squatted on by the Turkish army, as training camps. We can't utilise it when its under shit loads of concrete!
User avatar
Flying Horse
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:38 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Nikitas » Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:05 pm

Maximus put bluntly what I epxressed more delicately.

Kikapu, splitting the GC state into two was part of the Annan plan and the main reason I went against it.

The Annan plan, and the games the British play with Turkey over the SBAs are a geopolitical expression of the Cyprus problem, neithr Greece nor the RoC seem concerned about geopolitics, their big focual point is governance. This is not the first instance when the Greek side has shown total disregard for the strategic aspects of the problem. The Annan plan annexes regarding interim forces in Cyprus provided for crushing firepower advantages for the Turkish armed forces, with no protest at all from the Greek side.

The obvious question is why not? The Greek General staff go to the same NATO colleges and training seminars as their Turkish counterparts, they obviously knew the reasons for these provisions yet they said nothing publicly.

Personally I fear that if a settlement is left with a whole bunch of potential "unfinished businesses" there are groups on both sides that will use those issues to created problems just like in 1963 and in 1974. Failing to foresee and plan ahead is bad statesmanship, in my opinion.

Lordo sees the problem of a court case arising from, for example, a water line going from TC land over GC land to TC land, as miniscule. In which courts would the compulsory purchase order be resisted? Where would an appeal be heard? And what popular feelings would it fuel? Just think of the headline "poor GC farmer evicted over Turkish water pipe" and you get the pitcure. These are the questions that must be answered even over "miniscule" problems.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Kikapu » Mon Jul 20, 2015 10:13 pm

Lordo wrote:

you se kikapu it was done fairly here in 2004. each to their own.


Actually, No, I don't see it as being fairly done in 2004. According to the map you have provided, the distance between the SBA's land and the north state is ONLY about 1/2 a mile wide of the south state. How can the south state defend that small patch of land in the event the Brits decide to abandon the SBA and they send a telegram to Turkey for her to roll just in over 1/2 mile of south state into the SBA? No one in their right mind would accept that kind of land adjustment.
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13541
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Kikapu » Mon Jul 20, 2015 10:25 pm

Lordo wrote:of course not. the state line start from the south of terggish sector of famagusta and meanders around the gc sector which will be returned into pile and back up again and into pergama and back again all the way to ercan and then it meanders to pick up ercan and akincilar and back up to the magusa highway. but certainly the gc state will be split into two if they include any part of karpaz and what exactly is wrong with that. if they are uncomfortable driving across state line to get there perhaps they can build a tunnel to get there. that is entirely up to them. but if the gcs prefer a straight line with the old magusa lefkosa road i am sure akinci will be glad to exchange land on current values of course subject to tcs who wish to remain part of the southern administration and the gcs who wish to remain in the northern administration are allowed to do so.


Look, in “Kikapu's BBF Plan”, I talked about that the north and south states may have to be in 2-3 parts, as the case is with Kokkina for the north state and Karpaz for the south state. That's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about your idea of splitting the south state by the north state by taking part of the SBA down to the southern coast of Cyprus when the Brits are forced to leave the SBA's eventually. That will be a recipe for another war in Cyprus don't you think?
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13541
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Lordo » Mon Jul 20, 2015 11:18 pm

i have not had so much laugh for while. did you give the plan to akinci. i warn you if you don t do it soon you will be ignored. thinking about it you will be ignored anyway. so dont bother.

i have not said anything about taking the part of the north state to the southern coast. simply to return pile and pergama lands to their villages. where did i mention the southern coast unless the terggish sector of pila or pergama is on the south coast the question does not arrise. from what i have seen pila is at least 3 km north of the southern coast and pergama is even further away. you do like to make things up dont you.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11518
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Lordo » Mon Jul 20, 2015 11:20 pm

Flying Horse wrote:
Maximus wrote:
Lordo wrote:for once we agree. no state can separate without the permission of the other. as to the sba land, the village lands are all marked. the property should go back to the village it belonged to and to the actual people or their relatives that owned them originally.


The same thing should happen with all land stolen north of the green line. It should go back to the village and to the actual people or their relatives that owned then originally. The thieves and squatters that currently occupy should accept this and remove themselves from the problem so there can be a just and fair solution.


Our land should be returned to us, the actual owners. I aren't keen on this two state crap. People own land, it should go back to them, regardless where it is, but that's just me. If you have papers to prove it, it should go to you, plain and simple. I'd like to know what they will do for those that own land currently being literally squatted on by the Turkish army, as training camps. We can't utilise it when its under shit loads of concrete!

of course you do if only life was as simple as that. if only 1963 to 1974 did mot happen. if only. we would all be in our homes. but guess who started both wars.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11518
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Nikitas » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:04 pm

Precisely becaue life is not simple, and there are factions on both sides who will not accept any settlement and will continue to highlight any small problem, hoping to turn it into a big problem, it is wise to have a settlement that minimises grievances and friction.

Pergamos is 3 kilometers from the south coast, and a teat joining it to the rest of the TC sector effectively cuts the GC sector in two, leaving a 3 km gap for roads and all utilities to go from the major western part to Famagusta. And this is not going to fly. There is no way on earth the GCs will look at a map with all those teats and not understand the plans against them. They still teach geography in GC schools.

Why the British chose this moment to make the offer is the puzzle. And the perennial puzzle is why the territory arrangments are always left last to be discussed and very very last to be shown to the public. They have not learned from the Annan plan, when almost everyone from Famagusta saw the map and decided to vote no.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Re: SBAs and territory

Postby Lordo » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:19 pm

thats nonsense. pile is about 3 km from the coast pergama is more like 6. a3 goes through pile gc sector to the east. nobody id getting cut off from anywhere. if pile and pergama people cannot decide which side they should be with what kind of peace treaty is this. especially as they are already in the buffer zone and never left their village.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11518
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests