The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Everything related to politics in Cyprus and the rest of the world.

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Lordo » Sun Dec 27, 2015 9:58 pm

Maximus wrote:
ioann wrote:
Even if we somehow manage the ultimate victory and liberate Cyprus then the TCs would be demanding a return to the 1960 agreements which legally is their right.

Therefore instead of holding back for the highly unlikely ultimate victory I say that a two state 80-20% would be a nearly as good solution because in that case all Turks will be concentrated in that 20% and we will not have to deal with them. Let me tell you that Turkey would hate this arrangement because Turkey wants to take control of the whole Cyprus and such an agreement would finish off any claims they can have to the rest of Cyprus and to our EEZ.


Although you are right that the TC's would demand the 1960 arrangement if the liberation of the north comes to pass, I disagree that this is legally their right. Not now its not. Reverting back to that arrangement wouldn't amount to a liberation of the north anyway. It would amount to a Turkish victory and the whole of Cyprus would become what it would have been under the Annan plan, just without two constituent states. It would amount to the state of affairs in the 1960's and early seventies where conflict is highly probable. Possibly the worst outcome of all. They can demand, it does not mean they will get.

I used to think like this too, that a two state solution would finish off any claims they have for the rest of Cyprus. What you are essentially banking on though is that Turkey will be a good neighbor and respect the RoC's sovereign rights, not interfere and that the TC's will stay in their "country". Given their track record in the region, I wouldn't bank on either or find solace that that would be the end of the problem or that you wouldn't have to deal with them. it would just be the beginning of the next chapter of their belligerence with a stronger political and legal standing than what they have today.

Why? because Turkey wants to take control over the whole island and the EEZ, just as you say. And the TC's would help them.

They have "their" cake, they want to eat yours too now. It wouldn't be any different tomorrow with or without an "agreement".

you do post some shit boy.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11518
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby ioann » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:04 pm

Maximus wrote:
ioann wrote:
Even if we somehow manage the ultimate victory and liberate Cyprus then the TCs would be demanding a return to the 1960 agreements which legally is their right.

Therefore instead of holding back for the highly unlikely ultimate victory I say that a two state 80-20% would be a nearly as good solution because in that case all Turks will be concentrated in that 20% and we will not have to deal with them. Let me tell you that Turkey would hate this arrangement because Turkey wants to take control of the whole Cyprus and such an agreement would finish off any claims they can have to the rest of Cyprus and to our EEZ.


Although you are right that the TC's would demand the 1960 arrangement if the liberation of the north comes to pass, I disagree that this is legally their right. Not now its not. Reverting back to that arrangement wouldn't amount to a liberation of the north anyway. It would amount to a Turkish victory and the whole of Cyprus would become what it would have been under the Annan plan, just without two constituent states. It would amount to the state of affairs in the 1960's and early seventies where conflict is highly probable.

I used to think like this too, that a two state solution would finish off any claims they have for the rest of Cyprus. What you are essentially banking on though is that Turkey will be a good neighbor and respect the RoC's sovereign rights, not interfere and that the TC's will stay in their "country". Given their track record in the region, I wouldn't bank on either or find solace that that would be the end of the problem or that you wouldn't have to deal with them. it would just be the beginning of the next chapter of their belligerence with a stronger political and legal standing than what they have today.

Why? because Turkey wants to take control over the whole island and the EEZ, just as you say.

They have "their" cake, they want to eat yours too now. It wouldn't be any different tomorrow with or without an "agreement".


I don't like the 1960 agreements either but the BBF they plan to serve us is far worst. We would be celebrating if we could get a unitary state and return to the 1960 agreements. But those agreements were problematic also. Hoping that we will fully correct not only the result of the invasion but also what happened before that is a pipe dream. It is like hoping to win the lotto jackpot twice.

And I agree with you that Turkey will always be Turkey. They will never be a friendly nice neighbor. What we should do is be as strong as we can. A BBF weakens us. It downgrades us to a community status and we will not have control of the central goverment. The marionettes of Turkey would get veto power in all our decisions.

But a two state 20-80% would make us stronger than we are today. The TCs will have their own separate territory and own separate EEZ in the north and we will have ours in the south. Turkey will no longer be able to hide behind the TCs because our country will have nothing to do with TCs anymore and TCs will have no claims on our territory or EEZ. It is a win for us, a win for the TCs and a big loss for Turkey. This is why Turkey will not allow the TCs to do such thing and they need a very strong leadership if this is ever going to have any chance of happening.
ioann
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:21 pm

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:14 pm

ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:
ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:
ioann wrote: The Kurds have no rights in Turkey but they can still create problems to the Turks.


Only a Turk would say such a thing.


Only a whore would use the avatar you are using.


I'll take it that you cannot defend your claim that Kurds have no rights in Turkey.


Are you trying to defend the Turks now?

The Kurds have no rights as a community in Turkey of the kind that TCs demand for themselves.

Even if we somehow manage the ultimate victory and liberate Cyprus then the TCs would be demanding a return to the 1960 agreements which legally is their right.

Therefore instead of holding back for the highly unlikely ultimate victory I say that a two state 80-20% would be a nearly as good solution because in that case all Turks will be concentrated in that 20% and we will not have to deal with them. Let me tell you that Turkey would hate this arrangement because Turkey wants to take control of the whole Cyprus and such an agreement would finish off any claims they can have to the rest of Cyprus and to our EEZ.




Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8962
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby tsukoui » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:37 pm

What are our options for achieving option one?

1. Military action alone. 2. Military action with the aid of one or more foreign powers. 3. Military action by disgruntled TCs seeking to be part of the RoC again. 4. Peaceful assimilation converting TCs into Cypriots or even "Greeks".

Of these options only 4 is realistically possible yet we seem to be doing abysmally at it. Do not underestimate the power of assimilation. Look at Puerto Rico and the U.S. or Barack Obama and Condoleezza Rice (to risk a racial analogy). Look at how Islam rose. Look at how Alexander rose. Assimilation, if done correctly is extremely powerful and our best chance of reclaiming our homeland. This is where we should be focusing our energy.
tsukoui
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:10 pm

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby ioann » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:51 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )


I was referring to their legal rights as a community as afforded to them by the constitution of the country they live in.

Now tell me why you think that the Kurds have rights over Pontus. The Kurds have the sort of rights you referring to in the south-eastern part of the country. The Kurds do not have rights over the north-eastern part where is Pontus.
ioann
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:21 pm

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:02 pm

ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )


I was referring to their legal rights as a community as afforded to them by the constitution of the country they live in.


Right. You seem to agree with Turkey. So, expand on WHY they don't have these rights.
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8962
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby kurupetos » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:04 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )


I was referring to their legal rights as a community as afforded to them by the constitution of the country they live in.


Right. You seem to agree with Turkey. So, expand on WHY they don't have these rights.

He must be a galigantziaros. No worries, he's living in January 6th. :mrgreen:
User avatar
kurupetos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 17939
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Cyprus

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby ioann » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:10 pm

GreekIslandGirl wrote:
ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )


I was referring to their legal rights as a community as afforded to them by the constitution of the country they live in.


Right. You seem to agree with Turkey. So, expand on WHY they don't have these rights.


I don't agree with Turkey. I think the Kurds should have their own independent state in what is now south-eastern Turkey as well as parts of Iraq and Syria.

Now you tell me why you think the Kurds have rights over Pontus.
ioann
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:21 pm

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:18 pm

ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:
ioann wrote:
GreekIslandGirl wrote:Why can't you justify what you stated about the Kurds having no rights in Turkey?

You do realise the Kurds have MORE rights to eastern Turkey than any TC has to even 0.00000001% of Cyprus don't you?

(Changing the subject by jumping onto the 1960 agreement doesn't fool me. Nor does the fact any time soon, erolz66 will jump in to divert attention away from ioann's failings. :wink: )


I was referring to their legal rights as a community as afforded to them by the constitution of the country they live in.


Right. You seem to agree with Turkey. So, expand on WHY they don't have these rights.


I don't agree with Turkey. I think the Kurds should have their own independent state in what is now south-eastern Turkey as well as parts of Iraq and Syria.


So why won't Turkey give them 20:80 of Turkey as you want to give Turkey 20:80 of Cyprus?
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8962
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: Ranking the alternative outcomes of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Maximus » Sun Dec 27, 2015 11:42 pm

ioann wrote:
Maximus wrote:
ioann wrote:
Even if we somehow manage the ultimate victory and liberate Cyprus then the TCs would be demanding a return to the 1960 agreements which legally is their right.

Therefore instead of holding back for the highly unlikely ultimate victory I say that a two state 80-20% would be a nearly as good solution because in that case all Turks will be concentrated in that 20% and we will not have to deal with them. Let me tell you that Turkey would hate this arrangement because Turkey wants to take control of the whole Cyprus and such an agreement would finish off any claims they can have to the rest of Cyprus and to our EEZ.


Although you are right that the TC's would demand the 1960 arrangement if the liberation of the north comes to pass, I disagree that this is legally their right. Not now its not. Reverting back to that arrangement wouldn't amount to a liberation of the north anyway. It would amount to a Turkish victory and the whole of Cyprus would become what it would have been under the Annan plan, just without two constituent states. It would amount to the state of affairs in the 1960's and early seventies where conflict is highly probable.

I used to think like this too, that a two state solution would finish off any claims they have for the rest of Cyprus. What you are essentially banking on though is that Turkey will be a good neighbor and respect the RoC's sovereign rights, not interfere and that the TC's will stay in their "country". Given their track record in the region, I wouldn't bank on either or find solace that that would be the end of the problem or that you wouldn't have to deal with them. it would just be the beginning of the next chapter of their belligerence with a stronger political and legal standing than what they have today.

Why? because Turkey wants to take control over the whole island and the EEZ, just as you say.

They have "their" cake, they want to eat yours too now. It wouldn't be any different tomorrow with or without an "agreement".


I don't like the 1960 agreements either but the BBF they plan to serve us is far worst. We would be celebrating if we could get a unitary state and return to the 1960 agreements. But those agreements were problematic also. Hoping that we will fully correct not only the result of the invasion but also what happened before that is a pipe dream. It is like hoping to win the lotto jackpot twice.

And I agree with you that Turkey will always be Turkey. They will never be a friendly nice neighbor. What we should do is be as strong as we can. A BBF weakens us. It downgrades us to a community status and we will not have control of the central goverment. The marionettes of Turkey would get veto power in all our decisions.

But a two state 20-80% would make us stronger than we are today. The TCs will have their own separate territory and own separate EEZ in the north and we will have ours in the south. Turkey will no longer be able to hide behind the TCs because our country will have nothing to do with TCs anymore and TCs will have no claims on our territory or EEZ. It is a win for us, a win for the TCs and a big loss for Turkey. This is why Turkey will not allow the TCs to do such thing and they need a very strong leadership if this is ever going to have any chance of happening.


There is no doubt, that some would see a reversion back to the 1960's agreement as something to celebrate. I see it as something to be concerned about. Under these agreements, the GC community would be downgraded to just a community status also and lose their sovereign rights to Cyprus. So essentially you are being pedantic between a BBF with elements of the 1960's agreements included or reverting back to the 1960's agreement's in full. The risk of conflict increases in any of these two situations. Both are also worse deals than the status quo. The perceived gain of territory is undermined by real loses in sovereignty, freedoms, human rights and social progress. Furthermore, the GC community will be paying for this for as long as they can tolerate it by giving the TC's 30% of the central governments budget. :?

So what you are essentially asking under either arrangement is for the GC's to give up their sovereign rights to Cyprus, be downgraded to community status, lose some freedoms and human rights and hand over about 10-20% net of the governments budget to the TC's. They wont contribute more than they will take. No thanks! The status quo is better than either of these two. Its also better than a straight 80:20 split. The GG's gain nothing with any of these solutions.
Last edited by Maximus on Mon Dec 28, 2015 12:02 am, edited 4 times in total.
Maximus
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4274
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:23 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Elections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests