Cyprus-Forum.com

[Eliko]

miltiades, I do think you need to consider the opinions of others with a little more flexibility, you have apparently concluded that the issue is a clear cut choice between 'WAR' and 'PEACE' and I think you are misguided in reaching that conclusion.

I am sure Get Real (along with every other member) would prefer a just and peaceful settlement and that is where you seem to be having difficulty in understanding the support Get Real is receiving.

My own views (in the previous poll) were quite clear and brief, there would be little point in adopting your approach to a settlement since, quite frankly, I considered your proposals mere murmurings of what any of us may read in the gutter press, totally ineffective political claptrap.

Get Real, on the other hand, approaches the issue from a position which rallies the support of those who have a less myopic view of the situation in Cyprus, he is not suggesting that we should all march out and declare war on our own people, he is highlighting the option of military action should the negotiating capabilities of those who represent Cyprus should fail.

The ultimate objectives of both you and Get Real are very similar, they are in tandem with the majority of the members I am sure, the difference is that your proposals emanate from your weakness and willingness to follow the failed policies of the gullible, whereas Get Real declares his own opinions, THAT is why paphitis found it so easy to make his choice and the same reasons apply to my own.

In my humble opinion of course.

miltiades, 27 pages later, you are still failing to understand the significance of the comments made by members.

[miltiades]

miltiades, I do think you need to consider the opinions of others with a little more flexibility, you have apparently concluded that the issue is a clear cut choice between 'WAR' and 'PEACE' and I think you are misguided in reaching that conclusion.

I am sure Get Real (along with every other member) would prefer a just and peaceful settlement and that is where you seem to be having difficulty in understanding the support Get Real is receiving.

My own views (in the previous poll) were quite clear and brief, there would be little point in adopting your approach to a settlement since, quite frankly, I considered your proposals mere murmurings of what any of us may read in the gutter press, totally ineffective political claptrap.

Get Real, on the other hand, approaches the issue from a position which rallies the support of those who have a less myopic view of the situation in Cyprus, he is not suggesting that we should all march out and declare war on our own people, he is highlighting the option of military action should the negotiating capabilities of those who represent Cyprus should fail.

The ultimate objectives of both you and Get Real are very similar, they are in tandem with the majority of the members I am sure, the difference is that your proposals emanate from your weakness and willingness to follow the failed policies of the gullible, whereas Get Real declares his own opinions, THAT is why paphitis found it so easy to make his choice and the same reasons apply to my own.

In my humble opinion of course.

miltiades, 27 pages later, you are still failing to understand the significance of the comments made by members.

LETS SEE WHICH PART DID I GET WRONG.
KINDLY HIGHLIGHT IT FOR ME AND FOR EVERY ONE ELSE TO SEE:

The Military Option: Turkey Vs Cyprus

Any illusions of a complex inter-communal political arrangement being implemented in Cyprus is now history, Turkey’s EU make-believe journey is over, and it is now a race to get the upper hand in technology, political influence, and in the overall balance of power because unfortunately it’s become apparent that Cyprus can only be liberated in the same way it was enslaved… through bloodshed!

The RoC is very much aware of Turkey's size, manpower, and military expenditure, etc, so when push goes to shove it will be Turkey that will have the most surprises as she is the one that underestimates the Republic of Cyprus and not the other way round.

Unfortunately, Cyprus will have to sacrifice some of her young generations so that future generations of Cypriots will live free on their liberated island from the Turkic curse that began in 1571.

In the event of a war there is little doubt that the geopolitical repercussions will be severe for Turkey win or lose. Realistically, most wars don't last longer than a month and it is with strategic maneuvers with respect to time that cause the other side to panic, make errors, and then offer concessions on the negotiating table. The Republic of Cyprus can muster around 100,000 men, have stockpiles of modern firepower and equipment…

http://www.army.gov.cy/index.php?id=227

…including the ability to strike deep into southern Turkey with ballistic missiles so all southern Turkish naval ports that can be used to provide further reinforcements can be leveled. The Turkish air force can be countered by the newly acquired French Mistral S2A technology (this is actually the world’s finest S2A)… """"

I OBJECTED STRONGLY TO THE ABOVE AND THE POLL WAS A CHOICE BETWEEN THIS VIEW AND MY VIEW THAT NEGOGIATIONS MUST CONTINUE.
WHICH PART OF MY VIEWS DO YOU, ELIKO , CONSIDER AS GUTTER PRESS MATERIAL.

[Eliko]

miltiades, as was made clear to you in the early stages, there were only two options, YOURS and Get Reals.

Of the two, Get Real attracted greater support for several reasons, I will point to two.

Option 1.

Get Real consigned failed policies to HISTORY (which is where they belong precisely because they have failed) you would continue to negotiate and follow the same old failed route of those that should be consigned WITH the failed policies.

Any credibility that those who engaged in failed policies (who's words litter the pages of the gutter press ) had, should also be consigned to history together with the aforementioned words of failure.

We know the outcome of option 1, should we not dispense with it ?.

Option 2.

A new approach to the situation taken from a position of strength, instead of meekly accepting the ineffectual murmurings of failure (as above) a bold strategy of decisive policies which will inform those who fail to make the required efforts to secure a just settlement, that there exists a military alternative.

THAT is how I interpreted the meaning of Get Real's proposals, (or misinterpreted according to you) I would still rather support option 2. since option 1. HAS FAILED.

In my humble opinion of course.

[miltiades]

miltiades, as was made clear to you in the early stages, there were only two options, YOURS and Get Reals.

Of the two, Get Real attracted greater support for several reasons, I will point to two.

Option 1.

Get Real consigned failed policies to HISTORY (which is where they belong precisely because they have failed) you would continue to negotiate and follow the same old failed route of those that should be consigned WITH the failed policies.

Any credibility that those who engaged in failed policies (who's words litter the pages of the gutter press ) had, should also be consigned to history together with the aforementioned words of failure.

We know the outcome of option 1, should we not dispense with it ?.

Option 2.

A new approach to the situation taken from a position of strength, instead of meekly accepting the ineffectual murmurings of failure (as above) a bold strategy of decisive policies which will inform those who fail to make the required efforts to secure a just settlement, that there exists a military alternative.

THAT is how I interpreted the meaning of Get Real's proposals, (or misinterpreted according to you) I would still rather support option 2. since option 1. HAS FAILED.

In my humble opinion of course.

I find it incredulous that for an educated man that you appear to be , you fail miserably to comprehend the very basics of this debate.
In paragraph 1 of option 1 you endorse what GR stated that negotiations are now defunct and that negotiations thus far have to be HISTORY. You endorse this approach clearly, contrary to the fact that our government is currently engaged in negotiations. You are fully agreeing that further negotiations are futile and that NO MORE NEGOTIATIONS SHOULD TAKE PLACE AS YOU STATE ""I would still rather support option 2. since option 1. HAS FAILED.

OPTION 2 , in which you state "bold strategy of decisive policies which will inform those who fail to make the required efforts to secure a just settlement, that there exists a military alternative. ""
In other words , give us what we want or else we declare war.
It is frightening that such views exist amongst educated Cypriots , I'm glad however that I discovered from the very beginning , having seen your views on other matters , that your education was a complete and utter waste of money.
Go fight your war along Rambo and blackwater but remember one thing , this is reality not bloody comic book stories.
Just in case you interpret my views once again based on your own interpretation let me make them crystal clear.
I believe in negotiations leading to a solution of the Cyprob. I believe that a war not only it would achieve absolutely nothing but it would be a disaster of immeasurable dimensions.
I also stated many times that the RoC MUST BE READY TO DEFEND ITSELF AGAINST FURTHER AGGRESION.

[denizaksulu]

miltiades, as was made clear to you in the early stages, there were only two options, YOURS and Get Reals.

Of the two, Get Real attracted greater support for several reasons, I will point to two.

Option 1.

Get Real consigned failed policies to HISTORY (which is where they belong precisely because they have failed) you would continue to negotiate and follow the same old failed route of those that should be consigned WITH the failed policies.

Any credibility that those who engaged in failed policies (who's words litter the pages of the gutter press ) had, should also be consigned to history together with the aforementioned words of failure.

We know the outcome of option 1, should we not dispense with it ?.

Option 2.

A new approach to the situation taken from a position of strength, instead of meekly accepting the ineffectual murmurings of failure (as above) a bold strategy of decisive policies which will inform those who fail to make the required efforts to secure a just settlement, that there exists a military alternative.

THAT is how I interpreted the meaning of Get Real's proposals, (or misinterpreted according to you) I would still rather support option 2. since option 1. HAS FAILED.

In my humble opinion of course.

How can one say that option one has failed when to all intensive purposes, negotiations are still ongoing. Is it wishful thinking that you expect the current talks to fail?

Regards

[Eliko]

Gentlemen, to all intents and purposes, option 1 has failed. (in my opinion)

The new Prime Minister may well be pursuing a NEW direction in his negotiations, WE will never know what goes on behind the scenes, I DO believe that the outcome of whatever is taking place NOW, was decided a considerable time in the past.

What we do here is play games with the scant knowledge we glean from the information that we are ALLOWED to receive.

Do any of us seriously think that what we discuss on this forum is of any consequence to REAL issues ?.

I doubt it.

[Eliko]

miltiades, I do think you need to consider the opinions of others with a little more flexibility, you have apparently concluded that the issue is a clear cut choice between 'WAR' and 'PEACE' and I think you are misguided in reaching that conclusion.

I am sure Get Real (along with every other member) would prefer a just and peaceful settlement and that is where you seem to be having difficulty in understanding the support Get Real is receiving.

My own views (in the previous poll) were quite clear and brief, there would be little point in adopting your approach to a settlement since, quite frankly, I considered your proposals mere murmurings of what any of us may read in the gutter press, totally ineffective political claptrap.

Get Real, on the other hand, approaches the issue from a position which rallies the support of those who have a less myopic view of the situation in Cyprus, he is not suggesting that we should all march out and declare war on our own people, he is highlighting the option of military action should the negotiating capabilities of those who represent Cyprus should fail.

The ultimate objectives of both you and Get Real are very similar, they are in tandem with the majority of the members I am sure, the difference is that your proposals emanate from your weakness and willingness to follow the failed policies of the gullible, whereas Get Real declares his own opinions, THAT is why paphitis found it so easy to make his choice and the same reasons apply to my own.

In my humble opinion of course.

miltiades, 27 pages later, you are still failing to understand the significance of the comments made by members.

Please read AGAIN.

Bearing in mind that if option 1 had not failed, it would have succeeded (which it has not) therefore it should be confined to history.

[miltiades]

miltiades, I do think you need to consider the opinions of others with a little more flexibility, you have apparently concluded that the issue is a clear cut choice between 'WAR' and 'PEACE' and I think you are misguided in reaching that conclusion.

I am sure Get Real (along with every other member) would prefer a just and peaceful settlement and that is where you seem to be having difficulty in understanding the support Get Real is receiving.

My own views (in the previous poll) were quite clear and brief, there would be little point in adopting your approach to a settlement since, quite frankly, I considered your proposals mere murmurings of what any of us may read in the gutter press, totally ineffective political claptrap.

Get Real, on the other hand, approaches the issue from a position which rallies the support of those who have a less myopic view of the situation in Cyprus, he is not suggesting that we should all march out and declare war on our own people, he is highlighting the option of military action should the negotiating capabilities of those who represent Cyprus should fail.

The ultimate objectives of both you and Get Real are very similar, they are in tandem with the majority of the members I am sure, the difference is that your proposals emanate from your weakness and willingness to follow the failed policies of the gullible, whereas Get Real declares his own opinions, THAT is why paphitis found it so easy to make his choice and the same reasons apply to my own.

In my humble opinion of course.

miltiades, 27 pages later, you are still failing to understand the significance of the comments made by members.

Please read AGAIN.

Bearing in mind that if option 1 had not failed, it would have succeeded (which it has not) therefore it should be confined to history.

Eliko , may I once again utter the inevitable veracity .What a bloody waste of an education.
Scientists never give up in their continued efforts to discover new ways in treating human deceases such as cancer and other dilapidating deceases , they strive and strive till they are successful.
You and other like minded misguided individuals that can not see further than your noses have given up on negotiations and are convinced that WAR ON TURKEY WILL BRING THE SOLUTION REQUIRED !!!
Poor short sighted dreamers , you can not see how dangerous your views are , I'm glad our government does that's why they are carrying on with negotiations.
May I also state that with the exception of perhaps Paphitis all of you war mongers are anti American , anti West and Bin Laden disciples, its no bloody wonder you are all , 18 of you , a loss cause to a peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem . Once again , shame on you , you have sent entirely the wrong message .

[Piratis]

For the record, my vote would have gone to Miltiades which could have made this 'poll' 50/50.

Kind of sad that so many of us want to kill each other and sums up (imo) why we are in this mess in the first place

You got it wrong. The reason we are in the mess we are today is that you want to gain land and disproportionate amount of power on our loss, and you collaborate with Turkey and UK in order to deny to the Cypriot people democracy and self-determination.

We don't want to kill anybody. But I guess if Cyprus attempts to restore legality and order in the north occupied part of the Republic of Cyprus then you will start killing us again in order to impose your illegalities and steal our lands. Isn't it?

In very simplistic terms, the two options on this particualr poll had one member advocating a peaceful end via negotiations and another advocating the use of force (as & when necessary).

My interpretation is that half the voters agreed to the use of force and whatever way you look at it this option means that many people will die, and mostly innocent ones at that.

I guess if Cyprus attempts to restore 'legality and order in the north' as you put it, and uses forceful means as voted by half the voters to achieve this, then you are the ones who will start the killings.

War and conflict is not our choice, but defending our country and our sovereignty from foreign invadors is our obligation. War is the choice of Turkey and those TCs who illegally violate the sovereignty of Republic of Cyprus.

I hope that the foreign aggressors will withdraw from our country without the need for a fight. But if they insist on continuing the war against us then of course they should know that we will not surrender our lands to them and that we will defend our country and its sovereignty in all ways possible.

Just answer this question: Do you know any country in the history of mankind that would have the military capability to defend its sovereignty from a foreign invader and would choose not to do so? (and here I am talking about countries, not empires gifting or selling parts of their empires to others)

It really goes without saying that if Cyprus at some point in the future will be capable of liberating its own lands by a military action against the foreign invadors then it will do it.

[Viewpoint]

For the record, my vote would have gone to Miltiades which could have made this 'poll' 50/50.

Kind of sad that so many of us want to kill each other and sums up (imo) why we are in this mess in the first place

You got it wrong. The reason we are in the mess we are today is that you want to gain land and disproportionate amount of power on our loss, and you collaborate with Turkey and UK in order to deny to the Cypriot people democracy and self-determination.

We don't want to kill anybody. But I guess if Cyprus attempts to restore legality and order in the north occupied part of the Republic of Cyprus then you will start killing us again in order to impose your illegalities and steal our lands. Isn't it?

In very simplistic terms, the two options on this particualr poll had one member advocating a peaceful end via negotiations and another advocating the use of force (as & when necessary).

My interpretation is that half the voters agreed to the use of force and whatever way you look at it this option means that many people will die, and mostly innocent ones at that.

I guess if Cyprus attempts to restore 'legality and order in the north' as you put it, and uses forceful means as voted by half the voters to achieve this, then you are the ones who will start the killings.

War and conflict is not our choice, but defending our country and our sovereignty from foreign invadors is our obligation. War is the choice of Turkey and those TCs who illegally violate the sovereignty of Republic of Cyprus.

I hope that the foreign aggressors will withdraw from our country without the need for a fight. But if they insist on continuing the war against us then of course they should know that we will not surrender our lands to them and that we will defend our country and its sovereignty in all ways possible.

Just answer this question: Do you know any country in the history of mankind that would have the military capability to defend its sovereignty from a foreign invader and would choose not to do so? (and here I am talking about countries, not empires gifting or selling parts of their empires to others)

It really goes without saying that if Cyprus at some point in the future will be capable of liberating its own lands by a military action against the foreign invadors then it will do it.

You have learned nothıng just lıek ın the past you agaın forget thıs island also belongs to us has well and we have the right to defend ourselves.