Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Piratis,
When you get the balance of power, you may not give a fuck about the human rights of TCs, but the pseudoppupet will give a fuck about your human rights now, and soon you will enjoy all your rights as a proud citizen of pseudopupetlandia.

Don't worry bg-turk, when we get our balance of power we will make the same kind of "favors" to you.

[cypezokyli]

your historical example is flawd all the way.
history has proven more than once (including cyprus) that those we speak in favor of war in times of peace are the first ones to run away, after the first shots

think of yourself some 2000+ years back piratis. a young ambtious politician with rhetorik skills -alkiviadis, convinced athens to try and captury sicily.
it was during the time when the first peace agreement bw athens and sparta was signed with favorable terms for athens.
general lamahos, argued that the mission was too difficult , not to mention the possible benefits were higly contested
.
do you know what happened next ?
take a wild guess

while alkiviadis with the same ease past to the side of sparta,
lamahos left his bones in sicily, together with the whole athenian fleet.
not to mention that it was the beggining of the end for such a historic city.

[Piratis]

My example is about liberation and the change of balance of power. That what seems now impossible can become possible in the future. That we shouldn't have slave mentality.

history has proven more than once (including cyprus) that those we speak in favor of war in times of peace are the first ones to run away, after the first shots

I don't talk about war. I talk about justice, democracy and human rights. War should be used only when it can be won (with some exceptions) and only if everything else failed. (and so far this seems to be the case)

think of yourself some 2000+ years back piratis. a young ambtious politician with rhetorik skills -alkiviadis, convinced athens to try and captury sicily.

Why would I do that? It has nothing to do with me. It is like I ask you from think yourself as Hitler invading Poland.

[Agios Amvrosios]

However between a disguised partition of the kind of Annan plan and standard partition that is proposed here, the "standard" partition is much better.

I have to agree with Piratis 100%. Australians say "you have to shit or get off the pot." Either cyprus is united as a true democracy where the human rights of everyone are respected(including the right of refugees to live,work vote in their towns and villages) and not extinguished.

Following formal partition the Turkey and its its captured area can wander outside of the EU in the international wilderness as much as they like.The GC will not have the Turkish Cypriots milking welfare, health and education funds, either.

If turkish cypriots want their own little 100% pure ethnic turkish state then let them pay for it. If we accept a bizonal model tiganizoume to vlangi mas me tin milan mas. translation we are forced to fry our liver with our own body fat.

[cypezokyli]

excuse me just rechecked my sources.. it was nikias and not lamahos.
honestly one has to read these speaches between nikias and alkiviadis.
honestly, its like poetry

Why would I do that? It has nothing to do with me. It is like I ask you from think yourself as Hitler invading Poland.

hehe
we are talking about a period were these things were justified.
besides , they went there to help some others.there is always a fair excuse...

My example is about liberation and the change of balance of power. That what seems now impossible can become possible in the future. That we shouldn't have slave mentality.
I don't talk about war. I talk about justice, democracy and human rights. War should be used only when it can be won (with some exceptions) and only if everything else failed. (and so far this seems to be the case)

some general was arguing that the "liberating" army of greece shouldnt march to ankara... i mean it was liberating, what was rightfully greek. not to mention, that the balance of power seemed appropriate. lets not repead the outcomes , of that war of liberation and changing balance of power.

1948, cyprus is being offered a first proposal. not perfect, but still good enough.
1956, we practically get what we want. we reject it.
who rejected them?
people who thought that through a liberating war they could achieve sth more. ofcource, tragically they who rejected them didnot fight in battle. it is always like that.

ofcource it was our right to demand what the majority wanted. it was fair and just. the results are what worry me.

now if i may, allow me to return to nikias:
"the young people that sit in front of me, should not be ashamed if they dont vote if favor of war, bc others would consider them cowards, and not let yourselves carried away by a sick passion for things that are far away, but think that with wishes only few things can be achieved, while with precaution a lot"

isnt that poetry ?
honestly?

[Tony-4497]

So basically I am saying proportionality should be the aim of every GC, whether that means us divided or united.
..........
I also agree with this. However there is the problem that sadik said. Once we propose such thing, then instead of having Turkey occupying 37% of Cyprus, we will have disputed land between "TRNC" and RoC. Obviously we can not do this.

I disagree with the latter.

What the GC side should state is that ANY plan (we will not say we accept partition) that will be brought to the table needs to have 80% of the land under GC rule, on the basis of the population and land ownership percentages. Otherwise we refuse to start talks. Anyone who understands the current and projected political situation should be able to see clearly that this is the strategy that would yield the best results.

[Simon]

I think that some people are trying to make a problem with this solution when one does not exist.

What the GC side should state is that ANY plan (we will not say we accept partition) that will be brought to the table needs to have 80% of the land under GC rule, on the basis of the population and land ownership percentages. Otherwise we refuse to start talks. Anyone who understands the current and projected political situation should be able to see clearly that this is the strategy that would yield the best results.

I totally agree with this. We demand our 80% as a starting point. If it is not agreed to, the talks stop before negotiations have even started. Simple as that. I cannot see any logical reason why this cannot be done.

cypezokyli the more I listen to you the more I am really thankful that you're not the President. You say that we can't demand justice because we lost a war? Amazing. Let's just give the TCs the whole island then shall we, I bet that would make you happy.

By the way, if that 80% party is set up, i would definately like to join.

[cypezokyli]

simon wrote:

f it is not agreed to, the talks stop before negotiations have even started

tony wrote

...Otherwise we refuse to start talks

which cyprtiot politician does that remind me of ...hmm kind of difficult... what was he callled again? rauf was it?

can anyone explain to me what negotiate... dia - pragmatevomai , actually means?

great strategy. we dont talk until you give us what we want. with these in mind when would you say we should expect the solution-80? 2008, 2020, 2050? 2080 most probably. then it will rime.
in any case we can just wait till the tcs finaly realise that we right.
a milestone in the history of negotiations and politics.

cypezokyli the more I listen to you the more I am really thankful that you're not the President.

you can feel safe. no such ambitions up to now

You say that we can't demand justice because we lost a war? Amazing. Let's just give the TCs the whole island then shall we, I bet that would make you happy.

the great george bush junior sais sth similar : you are either with us or against us

By the way, if that 80% party is set up, i would definately like to join. Very Happy

all the best to our 63% party.....oh excuse me how much was that? ah yes 80%. i honestly apologise.

[Kifeas]

Simon,

However, as soon as your proposal is put on the table by the GC leadership, I believe, the Cyprus problem will automatically be solved in the eyes of the whole world. The disagreement between the sides will automatically be reduced to a disagreement on numbers, be it 18,20 or 25 percent. Current partition with 37% going to the TCs will eventually be legalized. The percentage, in this case, may be different only if the Turkish side unilaterally implements it, like what Sharon is planning to do in Israel.

For this reason, this proposal cannot be put forward by the GC side.

Precisely! I thoroughly agree with this argument!

The real choice that we have is not between the 20/80 partition and back to the 1960 RoC. This cannot be forced onto the Turkish side. Even threatening Turkey with a veto in the EU cannot force this type of a solution, because Cyprus cannot use the veto without the consent of the big EU countries.

Do not be so certain about this impossibility Sadik! Without an agreed solution and If it becomes a matter of salvaging the national cause, I have the feeling that either the parliament or the people through a referendum may go down to such an approach, regardless of who else from the EU may follow or may be opposed. Turkey becoming an EU member, without a prior agreed solution to the Cyprus problem, equates for the GCs like committing suicide. In fact, the accession process itself may be obstructed, even before a final accession is decided.

[sadik]

So basically I am saying proportionality should be the aim of every GC, whether that means us divided or united.

I also agree with this. However there is the problem that sadik said. Once we propose such thing, then instead of having Turkey occupying 37% of Cyprus, we will have disputed land between "TRNC" and RoC. Obviously we can not do this.

Your proposal sounds logical. At the first sight it looks like a win-win case for both sides.
...
The real choice that we currently have is between a BBF and the current partition. Which one do you prefer?

Well sadik, apparently a win-win situation is impossible and the only thing that Turks would accept now is if they win. IF the BBF that you talk about is one that respect the democratic and human rights of all Cypriots and the Federation is one like the USA (not 50%-50% etc) then I would accept. Otherwise we will maintain the status quo, until the time we will have the power to win the war, and then you me and cypezokyli will agree that GCs will be able to ask for a lot more without giving a fuck about your human rights (right cypezokyli? You will remind sadik that they lost the war, right?). Too bad the world works like this ah? Except of course you accept win - win. If not, then forget it that we will acept to be the losers, and believe me, you have a lot to loose from this conflict as well.

Where have I said, lets violate GCs human rights? I don't have an army and I am not in a position to influence international politics. I can only say what I observe.

My claim is that by focusing on the BBF, which has been on the table for the last 30 years and a lot of work has been done on, we can achieve a solution that will be acceptable and beneficial to both sides. It is not possible to fix all the human right violations, such as the loss of life, but we can ensure that this will not happen again.

For a solution to happen we need to create a win-win scenario. But we should try to get it where we can achieve. If we cannot agree on a BBF, then all the other solutions will be unilateral and not a real solution indead. Turkey would be delighted to see a partition plan put on the table by the GCs. For this reason this will never happen. Now, don't pretend that you don't know how big states are run, and don't pretend that Turkey is the only country that wants to get as much as it can. Greece would not have minded chopping half of Turkey off at the time.