The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Would NAI have been better?

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Socrates » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:02 am

And now the constitution is even safer.

In order to activate the 60 part must take the agreement of the UN.

I can even understand why we care about these conditions if there not giving rights to Turkey.

If the invasion was illegal then who cares about this agreements?

You are so stupid?
Socrates
Member
Member
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:10 pm

Postby Kifeas » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:23 am

Socrates wrote:And now the constitution is even safer.

In order to activate the 60 part must take the agreement of the UN.

I can even understand why we care about these conditions if there not giving rights to Turkey.

If the invasion was illegal then who cares about this agreements?

You are so stupid?


Re koroido Zoppovorte!
Read here re! Read what the UN charter says and chut up!

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter1.htm

Article 2
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.

All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.

The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Kikapu » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:36 am

Kifeas,

Aside from the 1990 Gulf war 1 against Iraq, how many other wars did the UN sanction since 1945, or did the members just did what they wanted anyway. Did Greece get UN's permission to send troops to Cyprus in 1974, in order to take over a functioning government, how ever flawed the Cypriot government was. At best, UN has good intensions, but at worst, it can't do a damn, when any nation wants to go unilaterally. Most nations claim that, their national security comes before anything else, so Turkey was no exception to that rule. Most unfortunate, but that's the way it is.
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13540
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Kifeas » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:50 am

Kikapu wrote:Kifeas,

Aside from the 1990 Gulf war 1 against Iraq, how many other wars did the UN sanction since 1945, or did the members just did what they wanted anyway. Did Greece get UN's permission to send troops to Cyprus in 1974, in order to take over a functioning government, how ever flawed the Cypriot government was. At best, UN has good intensions, but at worst, it can't do a damn, when any nation wants to go unilaterally. Most nations claim that, their national security comes before anything else, so Turkey was no exception to that rule. Most unfortunate, but that's the way it is.


All the above my friend are true, however, they do not make something legal under international law. The question here is not what the various countries do anyway, but whether what they do is legal under international law. Clearly, both the coup by the Junta, and the Turkish invasion, and the subsequent occupation by Turkey until now, are /were all illegal acts and violate international law and the UN charter!

And one small correction on what you said above. Greece did not send troops in Cyprus in 1974 for the coup, or for any other purpose. The coup was carried out by the Greek Cypriot National Guard, which was following orders of its high ranking mainland Greece officers that were already serving in its chain of command, upon instructions they received from the Greek junta to do so! The troops that carried out the coup, and attacked the presidential palace, were essentially a GC force. It was essentially GCs fighting against GCs in 1974 and not an invasion of mainland Greek troops as such!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Kikapu » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:56 am

Kifeas wrote:
Kikapu wrote:Kifeas,

Aside from the 1990 Gulf war 1 against Iraq, how many other wars did the UN sanction since 1945, or did the members just did what they wanted anyway. Did Greece get UN's permission to send troops to Cyprus in 1974, in order to take over a functioning government, how ever flawed the Cypriot government was. At best, UN has good intensions, but at worst, it can't do a damn, when any nation wants to go unilaterally. Most nations claim that, their national security comes before anything else, so Turkey was no exception to that rule. Most unfortunate, but that's the way it is.


All the above my friend are true, however, they do not make something legal under international law. The question here is not what the various countries do anyway, but whether what they do is legal under international law. Clearly, both the coup by the Junta, and the Turkish invasion, and the subsequent occupation by Turkey until now, are /were all illegal acts and violate international law and the UN charter!

And one small correction on what you said above. Greece did not send troops in Cyprus in 1974 for the coup, or for any other purpose. The coup was carried out by the Greek Cypriot National Guard, which was following orders of its high ranking mainland Greece officers that were already serving in its chain of command, upon instructions they received from the Greek junta to do so! The troops that carried out the coup, and attacked the presidential palace, were essentially a GC force. It was essentially GCs fighting against GCs in 1974 and not an invasion of mainland Greek troops as such!


Are you saying, that there were no mainland Greek soldiers at all during 1974 crises.??
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13540
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Kifeas » Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:04 am

Kikapu wrote:
Kifeas wrote:
Kikapu wrote:Kifeas,

Aside from the 1990 Gulf war 1 against Iraq, how many other wars did the UN sanction since 1945, or did the members just did what they wanted anyway. Did Greece get UN's permission to send troops to Cyprus in 1974, in order to take over a functioning government, how ever flawed the Cypriot government was. At best, UN has good intensions, but at worst, it can't do a damn, when any nation wants to go unilaterally. Most nations claim that, their national security comes before anything else, so Turkey was no exception to that rule. Most unfortunate, but that's the way it is.


All the above my friend are true, however, they do not make something legal under international law. The question here is not what the various countries do anyway, but whether what they do is legal under international law. Clearly, both the coup by the Junta, and the Turkish invasion, and the subsequent occupation by Turkey until now, are /were all illegal acts and violate international law and the UN charter!

And one small correction on what you said above. Greece did not send troops in Cyprus in 1974 for the coup, or for any other purpose. The coup was carried out by the Greek Cypriot National Guard, which was following orders of its high ranking mainland Greece officers that were already serving in its chain of command, upon instructions they received from the Greek junta to do so! The troops that carried out the coup, and attacked the presidential palace, were essentially a GC force. It was essentially GCs fighting against GCs in 1974 and not an invasion of mainland Greek troops as such!


Are you saying, that there were no mainland Greek soldiers at all during 1974 crises.??


No!

The only Greek troops that existed in Cyprus in 1974, were the 950 soldiers of the Eldyk force that was provided by the 1960 agreements, likewise its equivalent Turkish force in north Nicosia, but this Greek force did not take direct involvement in the actual attacks.

The coup was executed by the RoC National Guard's four commando raider battalions (Greek Cypriots) and one -again GC, tank battalion. However, as I said, all these units had on the top of the officer pyramid, mainland Greek officers in charge, which gave the orders.
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Kikapu » Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:08 am

Kifeas,

Got it.
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13540
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Socrates » Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:07 am

All I’m trying to say is what we’ve give them a legal weapon and this is well known if it was otherwise we shouldn’t care at all about the guarantees issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Invasion_of_Cyprus

In 1974, a coup d'état by Greek Army officers stationed on the Mediterranean island of Cyprus, tried to overthrow the then-President Makarios. This action led to the subsequent Turkish military invasion (under the provisions of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee) [1]. The Treaty of Guarantee provided that Greece, Turkey and United Kingdom would ensure the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. Turkey announced that the invasion was a "peace-keeping operation" to restore the constitutional order disrupted when a Greek military coup overthrew the Cyprus government. Turkey claimed she was acting in compliance with the terms of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. Upon these conditions, Turkey invaded Cyprus in two waves on 20 July and 14 August and continues to remain as a forceful presence (Turkish Cypriots regard them as a protection force) on the island in violation of the UN Charter and repeated UN Security Council Resolutions.


And if you seeking for traitors by you psycopath logic then you should accuse Makarios beacouse in his speech accouse Greece for invation.


Edited by Admin

Swearing removed.

Socrates you have been warned before. Please stop swearing and provoking others.
You can make your point in more civilized manner.
Socrates
Member
Member
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:10 pm

Postby Socrates » Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:26 am

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/Greek%20 ... 201974.htm


On 14th August 1974 (Daily Telegraph 15th August) Prime Minister Ecevit confirmed that he had indeed traveled to London to urge Anglo-Turkish intervention. However the then Labour Government in Britain refused to take any effective action, even though they had troops and aircraft available in their Sovereign Bases in Cyprus.
They argued that Britain was under no duty to take military action, but Article II provided that Britain would guarantee the state of affairs established by the 1960 Constitution, which it manifestly failed to do. The Select Committee concluded that "Britain had a legal right to intervene, she had a moral obligation to intervene. She did not intervene for reasons which the (Labour) Government refuses to give."In an article on 28th February 1976 in the Greek Cypriot press Father Papatsestos said: "In is a rather hard thing to say, but it is true that the Turkish intervention saved us from a merciless internecine war. The Sampson regime had prepared a list of all Makarios supporters, and they would have slaughtered them all." Many of the people saved by Turkey are members of the present Greek Cypriot leadership.


You are so psychopath that you take the 1 and make it seems 1000 you are very funny as I’ve said also the admin is very funny.

I don’t remember exactly what I’ve write above?

Zoppovortos Toppouzokipreos?

I don’t remember but if it was something like that you also have some problem because he is using exactly the same words and is not insult is the truth he is just another one toppouzo nationalist who have started the attacks with the traitor thing.
Socrates
Member
Member
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:10 pm

Postby miltiades » Tue Jul 04, 2006 8:52 am

Kikapu , re: guarantees , Im referring primarily to the guarantees required by the majority of Cypriots that Turkey would have not reneged on commitments given in the agreement concerning the implementation of the plan and the removal of the occupying army as per the timetable agreed. As far as Turkey guarantying the safety of T/Cs , how would one include this in an agreement. Turkey has the right to intervene in order to protect the T/Cs if unrest began , at which point would Turkey be given the legal right to do so.
The T/Cs need to be convinced that the UN , USA , Britain and Europe , along with the Turkish and Greek contingents in the island would be sufficient to ensure , not only the smooth implementation of the agreement but also to guarantee the safety of all Cypriots. You are not been very fair if indeed you consider that the 82% of Cypriots should be happy to accept their perceived enemy , Turkey , to guarantee the implementation of the plan.Kikapu , the 82 % see Turkey as the invader and the occupying power , I get the feeling that Turkey sees Cyprus as an extension of it self.That is not the case according to international protocols and historical realities.
Here is an island that now has apart from the Greek and Turkish Cypriots , a very sizable minority of citizens from other parts of the globe. Rest assured that in years to come the demographics will change.Are we to perhaps see the Russian community increasing to a size that along with the already large British and Eastern European communities will begin to legitimately demand a say in the affairs of Cyprus. All of this "new Cypriots" will also demand their human rights , and the EU will be the one they would look to not Turkey.
User avatar
miltiades
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16317
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest