Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

GR wrote

And finally, people like myself who desire to preserve the contiguousness, constitution, and sovereignty of Cyprus are CYPRIOT NATIONALISTS

.

All nationalisms are unacceptable, including your type GR. Then, when you say Cypriot nationalism, I kind of think that what you really mean is Greek Cypriot Nationalism. Unluckily for you, stupid franks exist only in the minds of ... nationalists (who tend to walk on clouds most of the time and look for the desirable instead of the feasible) .

[phoenix]

GR wrote

And finally, people like myself who desire to preserve the contiguousness, constitution, and sovereignty of Cyprus are CYPRIOT NATIONALISTS

.

All nationalisms are unacceptable, including your type GR. Then, when you say Cypriot nationalism, I kind of think that what you really mean is Greek Cypriot Nationalism. Unluckily for you, stupid franks exist only in the minds of ... nationalists (who tend to walk on clouds most of the time and look for the desirable instead of the feasible) .

Bananiot . . . I can't help thinking that if it was not for those that look for the desirable instead of merely the feasible . . . we would all still be akin to chimps swinging from trees

[Bananiot]

Can't really see how evolution fits into this debate. Are you proposing that going for the desirable is better than going for what is feasible? Well, in this case, our history teaches us that every time we heeded the call from the cloud climbers we paid a hefty penalty. We have lost half of our country and we have not learned yet.

By the way, I am glad you are a proponent of the evolution theory. It is a scientific proposal which is built upon concrete evidence that cannot be challenged, but if you insist on drawing a parallel with geopolitical phenomena, perhaps I can furnish you with some, but this would probably go against the current scientific thinking (not belief) which stipulates that man evolved totally accidentally.

[denizaksulu]

GR wrote

And finally, people like myself who desire to preserve the contiguousness, constitution, and sovereignty of Cyprus are CYPRIOT NATIONALISTS

.

All nationalisms are unacceptable, including your type GR. Then, when you say Cypriot nationalism, I kind of think that what you really mean is Greek Cypriot Nationalism. Unluckily for you, stupid franks exist only in the minds of ... nationalists (who tend to walk on clouds most of the time and look for the desirable instead of the feasible) .

Bananiot . . . I can't help thinking that if it was not for those that look for the desirable instead of merely the feasible . . . we would all still be akin to chimps swinging from trees

[denizaksulu]

Can't really see how evolution fits into this debate. Are you proposing that going for the desirable is better than going for what is feasible? Well, in this case, our history teaches us that every time we heeded the call from the cloud climbers we paid a hefty penalty. We have lost half of our country and we have not learned yet.

By the way, I am glad you are a proponent of the evolution theory. It is a scientific proposal which is built upon concrete evidence that cannot be challenged, but if you insist on drawing a parallel with geopolitical phenomena, perhaps I can furnish you with some, but this would probably go against the current scientific thinking (not belief) which stipulates that man evolved totally accidentally.

[phoenix]

Bananiot I do not propose extremes of one or the other. I said "merely".

But to put desirability versus feasibility into a geopolitical context . . . if Columbus had not "desired" to circumnavigate the globe to find a different route to India, and had been thwarted by the school of "feasibility", we would not have had America on our maps so soon.

As for Evolution; we have a theory because it can be challenged, is testable and above all falsifiable by Popper's principles. Pleased to say it has stood up to all scientific rigours.

Man's accidental emergence is not new but inherent in Darwin's proposal. Again to put this in context . . . it is the "cloud climbers" that capitalise on the desirable use of the accidents (mutations) and therefore adapt to new challenges / environments and not the "feasibility" first ditherers (which are more susceptible to extinction).

I think the (inaptly named) "Intelligent Design" lobby fit in better with the "feasibility" thinkers.

[Bananiot]

In politics you have to choose. It took a long time for Makarios to realise that he could go only after the feasible but the writing was already on the all. Those that insisted on the desirable overthrew him and the results you know I am sure.

Why do you insist on drawing parallels that do not exist. Columbus discovered the Americas because it was feasible at the time. Had he failed, though, the Portuguese, let's say, wouldn't have taken half of Spain. He put only his own neck at stake. When we went all out for the desirable we put our country at risk, against a mighty enemy whom we had no means to defeat. Can you not see this? Besides, I am talking about a principle that is well known to all political science students and really I cannot see why you are challenging it. In a nutshell, a small country like our will be exterminated if once again those that opt for the desirable are allowed to take centre stage.

By the way, evolutionis a fact, not a theory.

[phoenix]

In politics you have to choose. It took a long time for Makarios to realise that he could go only after the feasible but the writing was already on the all. Those that insisted on the desirable overthrew him and the results you know I am sure.

You are contradicting yourself and hence evolving towards my argument. Here you are now saying the victors are those that seek "desirability" . . . yet above you claimed we should seek what was "feasible".
Turkey went for what it desired.

Why do you insist on drawing parallels that do not exist. Columbus discovered the Americas because it was feasible at the time. Had he failed, though, the Portuguese, let's say, wouldn't have taken half of Spain. He put only his own neck at stake.

Columbus did not know it was feasible at the time . . . they worried they would fall off the Earth . . . yet their desire to explore saw them through.

When we went all out for the desirable we put our country at risk, against a mighty enemy whom we had no means to defeat. Can you not see this?

No . . . you've lost me here . . . what do you mean? when?

Besides, I am talking about a principle that is well known to all political science students and really I cannot see why you are challenging it.

Principles are there to be challenged, that is my desire and it proves feasible.

In a nutshell, a small country like our will be exterminated if once again those that opt for the desirable are allowed to take centre stage.

Your fears are unfounded. Desire can move mountains when it is coupled with intelligence. That is the Human spirit. Besides it can prove if something is feasible.

By the way, evolutionis a fact, not a theory.

Sorry I assumed you were scientifically minded . . "facts" are merely the set of figures or evidence used to justify the higher principle, which we refer to as a "Theory". Evolution has EARNED the term "Theory" because it has not been falsified. It does not diminish Evolution to be labelled a Theory . . . it has raised it scientifically from being just a simple "fact".

I think you may be getting mixed up with the term "in theory".

[Nikitas]

Bananiot,

What is desirable at this present stage is not the same as in the 50s. We all agree that Enosis is out, we Cypriots do not want it and Greece would not be interested, it never really was. Which explains that they never risked anything to achieve it.

Today what is desirable is full independence as a Federal Republic, at least that is what I gather from listening to mature people of both sides. Do you consider this goal feasible? Becaue judging from what we hear from Turkey lately it is not, and we should settle for a total separation in two nations, two nationalities, two religions etc.

Can you clarify please?

[MR-from-NG]

Your fears are unfounded. Desire can move mountains when it is coupled with intelligence. That is the Human spirit. Besides it can prove if something is feasible.

What a load of bollocks. I'd be convinced if you could move (or remove) just an image off the face of the mountain let alone the whole thing.

Honestly, some people are just so bloody annoying.