The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive actions

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Flying Horse » Fri Apr 04, 2014 10:44 pm

My understanding was that Taksim demands began in the 50s.
User avatar
Flying Horse
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:38 pm

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Viewpoint » Fri Apr 04, 2014 10:46 pm

Flying Horse wrote:My understanding was that Taksim demands began in the 50s.


Direct response to enosis, Gcs wanted to give away the whole island to Greece wheras TCs wanted to share with GCs.
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25214
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Viewpoint » Fri Apr 04, 2014 11:02 pm

boulio wrote:See i know what the document says and so do you but you cant come to say it because it destorys your thesis and that is why you WILL NEVER BE RECOGNIZED.So go and write a thesis about that.



Never say never, one rejection at referendum by the GCs woud push international opinion towards Taiwan style part recognition imho.
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25214
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Mustiejodu » Fri Apr 04, 2014 11:51 pm

Viewpoint wrote:
boulio wrote:what problem to solve VP?THE JUNTA IN ATHENS AND SAMPSON in lefkosia were gone,Makarios was alive.

what heavy resistence ?are you making tghings up tio justify your expansionist policy in cyprus.

Im still waiting to tell me what the security agreement says,not your thesis on the matter.Turkey signed a documnet that gave her rights to intervene,after she intervenes in the documents what are her obligations?


You conveniently forget the problems for the TCs started in 1963 and exploded in 1974, the first invasion was not the Turks but the Greek army and coup to achieve enosis, Sampson may have been removed but the arrow had already left the bow, the GCs had left things to late they had a full 14 years to put things right but what did they do keep the enosis flame alight and alienate the TCs. You played with fire and got burned complaining or denying the reality of the past will not make it go away, accept it and move on.

Tell that to the Turkish soldiers that died when trying to land on the beaches in Kyrenia, but this is something you can never accept as you are a GCs and all your suffering was caused by everyone else but yourselves.

Turkey under the 1960 agreements had the right to intervene and she did, her role is to bring about a solution and leave, do we have a solution NO so its only natural that she stays.


Excellent peace of response and to the point .
Mustiejodu
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:02 am

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby boulio » Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:14 am

Viewpoint wrote:
boulio wrote:See i know what the document says and so do you but you cant come to say it because it destorys your thesis and that is why you WILL NEVER BE RECOGNIZED.So go and write a thesis about that.



Never say never, one rejection at referendum by the GCs woud push international opinion towards Taiwan style part recognition imho.


Are you thick or just play being so?do you understand you will never be recognized because of ethnic cleaning either formally or Taiwan style.

Another idiotic commit Taiwan style ,what are we order Chinese food?
boulio
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby boulio » Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:14 am

Mustiejodu wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:
boulio wrote:what problem to solve VP?THE JUNTA IN ATHENS AND SAMPSON in lefkosia were gone,Makarios was alive.

what heavy resistence ?are you making tghings up tio justify your expansionist policy in cyprus.

Im still waiting to tell me what the security agreement says,not your thesis on the matter.Turkey signed a documnet that gave her rights to intervene,after she intervenes in the documents what are her obligations?


You conveniently forget the problems for the TCs started in 1963 and exploded in 1974, the first invasion was not the Turks but the Greek army and coup to achieve enosis, Sampson may have been removed but the arrow had already left the bow, the GCs had left things to late they had a full 14 years to put things right but what did they do keep the enosis flame alight and alienate the TCs. You played with fire and got burned complaining or denying the reality of the past will not make it go away, accept it and move on.

Tell that to the Turkish soldiers that died when trying to land on the beaches in Kyrenia, but this is something you can never accept as you are a GCs and all your suffering was caused by everyone else but yourselves.

Turkey under the 1960 agreements had the right to intervene and she did, her role is to bring about a solution and leave, do we have a solution NO so its only natural that she stays.


Excellent peace of response and to the point .


There goes the peanut gallery again.
boulio
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Viewpoint » Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:20 am

boulio wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:
boulio wrote:See i know what the document says and so do you but you cant come to say it because it destorys your thesis and that is why you WILL NEVER BE RECOGNIZED.So go and write a thesis about that.



Never say never, one rejection at referendum by the GCs woud push international opinion towards Taiwan style part recognition imho.


Are you thick or just play being so?do you understand you will never be recognized because of ethnic cleaning either formally or Taiwan style.

Another idiotic commit Taiwan style ,what are we order Chinese food?


Then you have nothing to worry about....or do you?
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25214
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Demonax » Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:47 am

Viewpoint wrote:
Flying Horse wrote:My understanding was that Taksim demands began in the 50s.


Direct response to enosis, Gcs wanted to give away the whole island to Greece wheras TCs wanted to share with GCs.



VP in fantasy land... :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Demonax
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:05 am

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Demonax » Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:59 am

Viewpoint wrote:
boulio wrote:See i know what the document says and so do you but you cant come to say it because it destorys your thesis and that is why you WILL NEVER BE RECOGNIZED.So go and write a thesis about that.



Never say never, one rejection at referendum by the GCs woud push international opinion towards Taiwan style part recognition imho.


Don’t get your hopes up. Firstly, no Cyprus President will, in future, consider going to a referendum without a solution that the overwhelmingly majority of GCs would accept.

Secondly, UN resolutions expressly forbid recognition of the 'trnc' and condemn the pseudo-state as an illegal entity – and that isn't going to change.
User avatar
Demonax
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:05 am

Re: Why does no one directly object to turkey's invasive act

Postby Pyrpolizer » Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:50 pm

Mustiejodu wrote:I have seen a lot of comments on this site about turkey invading eu waters ,turkey flying over eu air space or turkey sailing boats in eu waters etc etc . Why does no one actually take any action ? Has anyone ever questioned the actions of the eu or USA or uk. Over this matter. Why do they not raise this with turkey and why does this never bother turkey. The reason is very simple and once you look at the logical side to this and not get bogged down with the local politics you will see the bigger picture. When turkey states it's there as a peace keeping operation there is actually a twisted truth to her presence. I will let tho intelligent people explain to me why because if you can't see this then I will give you a hint. Recently Russia showed its true colours and took what country? That is the clue ?


Ok back to the original question.
Imo the reason nobody reacts is because in reality nothing changes from Turkey's actions.If something really changes e.g Turkey obstructing any of the operations for hydrocarbons there will be severe reaction be sure of that
There is a balance in every status quo. You said this balance is desirable because Turkey's presence here is to counterbalance whatever Russian presence the GCs would opt to.
However this "balance" creates another imbalance. Turkey gets extended control on areas that presumably are under British control via the British bases. It pushes the GCs to seek protection from Russia. And many other imbalances... The alternative to clear all those imbalances is simply to solve the Cyprus problem.

Now regarding the Crimea crisis. What has really changed? Nothing!! The Russians already had control of the Northern Caspian sea through their military presence in Crimea. Crimea was autonomous and had it's own parliament. Has anything of real essence changed? Isn't it obvious that what happened in Crimea was simply an effort to seal/protect Russians interests over the North of Caspian? Russians were simply afraid that given the unstable situation in Ukraine they would soon lose the control they ALREADY HAD of Northern Caspian sea.
The EU and their allies simply got pissed off because their plans did not go as smooth as they wanted to.
Other than that they just forgot everything within days.

NB. Obama said: Nobody doubts Russia's interests in Crimea (translation: Crimea means Northen Caspia sea)
Putin said:Of course! And that's what we did. We secured/sealed our interests in Crimea.((translation: Crimea means Northen Caspia sea)
Therefore "soru yok" :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Pyrpolizer
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12892
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:33 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests