The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Political equality

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Re: Political equality

Postby Sotos » Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:08 pm

Stop talking crap Vordo. Dektash never accepted the 13 points.

When you decide that you want the 1960 agreements let us know. When you reject those agreements and demand something completely different then anything we agreed to back then is null and void and you are just a minority as far as I am concerned.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11357
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: Political equality

Postby Lordo » Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:26 pm

Sotos wrote:Stop talking crap Vordo. Dektash never accepted the 13 points.

When you decide that you want the 1960 agreements let us know. When you reject those agreements and demand something completely different then anything we agreed to back then is null and void and you are just a minority as far as I am concerned.

lets hope majority of the population is not at your level of understaning. lets hear anastasiades suggest he wishes to retrun to 1960 and see what akinci will respond. ignore terggy.

it is so magnanemous of you to offer us back our veto in the roc. we really like that and appreciate your good gesture and we will rescipricate, onest gov.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 21561
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Walk on Swine walk on

Re: Political equality

Postby kurupetos » Wed Feb 20, 2019 7:51 pm

Lordo wrote:
Sotos wrote:Stop talking crap Vordo. Dektash never accepted the 13 points.

When you decide that you want the 1960 agreements let us know. When you reject those agreements and demand something completely different then anything we agreed to back then is null and void and you are just a minority as far as I am concerned.

lets hope majority of the population is not at your level of understaning. lets hear anastasiades suggest he wishes to retrun to 1960 and see what akinci will respond. ignore terggy.

it is so magnanemous of you to offer us back our veto in the roc. we really like that and appreciate your good gesture and we will rescipricate, onest gov.

Veto and other recipes for disaster will never be accepted again.

If you had brains, you wouldn't want this crap either. :roll:
User avatar
kurupetos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 18855
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Cyprus

Re: Political equality

Postby Pyrpolizer » Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:20 pm

Sotos wrote:Our arms will create to Turkey a heavy cost if it invades. Even in 1974, when GCs were fighting each other and there was chaos due to the coup, Turkish army still had over 2000 casualties. Today the cost to Turkey will be much greater. With a BBF we will be completely undefended and Turkey can just take the whole of Cyprus without any kind of resistance.


What 2000 casualties? Where did you get that number from? If you learn the exact number you will be embarrassed. And half of it was from a ship of their own they sank by mistake. The truth is we DID NOT FIGHT in 1974. Every Kostis Yianni dropped his arms and run up the mountains.

Sotos wrote:Be specific about what we will get in the long run. The negatives are now so many that far outweigh the positives, in both the short term and the long term. The only way that the benefits can outweigh the negatives is if we get more in terms of land and properties, and give up less in terms of power sharing. Otherwise it is just another Annan plan, which was overwhelmingly rejected.


Lordo already posted an article which explains it in detail.There have been hundreds more in the newspapers over time.
The Annan Plan wwas rejected for a lot of reasons, one of which was because we thought getting in the EU would start raining justice.
We already know more or less what kind of solution Anastasiades is almost ready to accept: Less properies back, less Morphou back, Varoshia and a few villages back without resettlement of current users, all settlers stay, plus 650 Vs 900 Turkish and Greek soldiers staying according to the treaty of alliance (not the treaty of Guarantee). All TCs who got GC ‘exchange land" from Denktash lose the properties they left behind and some GCs with the right connections get them. Compensations from the hydrocarbons if we ever get a penny from those.
Do you think we will be able to reject Anastasiades Plan? Do you realize the consequences?
Last edited by Pyrpolizer on Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Pyrpolizer
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12892
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: Political equality

Postby Pyrpolizer » Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:50 pm

Sotos wrote:What you describe is what the Turks want, and I do not accept it, as it violates a democratic principle and defeats the point of GCs having a greater number.

What you describe is not very different from having 5 GCs and 5 TCs:

If it gets a yes from 5 GCs and just one yes from the 5 TCs, it gets approved.
If all GCs say no, and all TCs say yes it drops. If all GCs say yes and All TCs say no, it drops again.

Having a greater number means having a greater say. Otherwise having a greater number is pointless.


Nonsense! Explain to me in what way you think the political equality (as defined and clarified by the UN) could ever be applied in a way that would not empower the GC community to force the TC community to accept measures against their interests.

I am all ears! Go on.
User avatar
Pyrpolizer
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12892
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: Political equality

Postby Sotos » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:39 am

Pyrpolizer wrote:
Sotos wrote:Our arms will create to Turkey a heavy cost if it invades. Even in 1974, when GCs were fighting each other and there was chaos due to the coup, Turkish army still had over 2000 casualties. Today the cost to Turkey will be much greater. With a BBF we will be completely undefended and Turkey can just take the whole of Cyprus without any kind of resistance.


What 2000 casualties? Where did you get that number from? If you learn the exact number you will be embarrassed. And half of it was from a ship of their own they sank by mistake. The truth is we DID NOT FIGHT in 1974. Every Kostis Yianni dropped his arms and run up the mountains.


Here on the sidebar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_i ... _of_Cyprus

Pyrpolizer wrote:
Sotos wrote:Be specific about what we will get in the long run. The negatives are now so many that far outweigh the positives, in both the short term and the long term. The only way that the benefits can outweigh the negatives is if we get more in terms of land and properties, and give up less in terms of power sharing. Otherwise it is just another Annan plan, which was overwhelmingly rejected.


Lordo already posted an article which explains it in detail.There have been hundreds more in the newspapers over time.
The Annan Plan wwas rejected for a lot of reasons, one of which was because we thought getting in the EU would start raining justice.
We already know more or less what kind of solution Anastasiades is almost ready to accept: Less properies back, less Morphou back, Varoshia and a few villages back without resettlement of current users, all settlers stay, plus 650 Vs 900 Turkish and Greek soldiers staying according to the treaty of alliance (not the treaty of Guarantee). All TCs who got GC ‘exchange land" from Denktash lose the properties they left behind and some GCs with the right connections get them. Compensations from the hydrocarbons if we ever get a penny from those.
Do you think we will be able to reject Anastasiades Plan? Do you realize the consequences?


Those articles come from a minority of Yes men/women who are trying to mislead people. And yes, we can reject any new similar plan. What is to stop me from voting "no" like last time? Yes, there might be consequences, but not even close enough to the consequences of accepting such a disastrous solution. Anastasiades knows this, which is why there will be no referendum again for any such solution.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11357
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: Political equality

Postby Sotos » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:55 am

Pyrpolizer wrote:
Sotos wrote:What you describe is what the Turks want, and I do not accept it, as it violates a democratic principle and defeats the point of GCs having a greater number.

What you describe is not very different from having 5 GCs and 5 TCs:

If it gets a yes from 5 GCs and just one yes from the 5 TCs, it gets approved.
If all GCs say no, and all TCs say yes it drops. If all GCs say yes and All TCs say no, it drops again.

Having a greater number means having a greater say. Otherwise having a greater number is pointless.


Nonsense! Explain to me in what way you think the political equality (as defined and clarified by the UN) could ever be applied in a way that would not empower the GC community to force the TC community to accept measures against their interests.

I am all ears! Go on.



It is called democracy and by specifying that "political equality" does not equal "numerical equality" the UN clarifies that, with some exceptions, standard democratic rules apply. In a democracy you don't always get what serves the interests of your own group, but what is best for the overall population. By this I don't mean any decision will violate the rights of TCs, but "rights" and "interests" are two completely different things.

Otherwise there will be deadlocks and everything will collapse. Or you can add another step: There will be deadlocks, decisions will be taken randomly, and everything will collapse. Such system can never work.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11357
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: Political equality

Postby Maximus » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:47 pm

Pyrpolizer wrote:There can be huge benefits with a solution.
The only possibility to have no benefits is to get under the control of Turkey via guarantees.
Even if the Central state gets stuck on certain decisions the benefits will still be there, as we will continue functioning with the original law, plus the new EU directives.

It's not only what the GCs and TCs will get on day 1. It's what we will get in the long run.
Problem is most people think only of day one, and rightfully link it to the future benefits as well.
Unfortunately what the Gcs will be getting on day 1 is getting less and less (maybe it's zero already?) and that's the fault of the TCs exclusively.

I think we are already at the point that most GCs think it doesn't worth it any more.


What Cyprus needs in the long run is to be a fully democratic, independent country.

The settlers and the separatists in the north should transition out of Cyprus, along with the Turkish army.

I cant see what else needs to happen, except receiving some compensation from the occupier for Varosha etc. I highly doubt that though but I cant see what else needs to change.

This is the best solution for everyone and I mean everyone, including Turkey.
Maximus
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7520
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Political equality

Postby Pyrpolizer » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:20 pm



These are estimated numbers from people who wrote books saying they had 1500 dead and 2000 wounded.
This link however says they had 498 dead and 1200 wounded
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_ ... _of_Cyprus
And this that the Turkish Military had only 309 dead.
https://cyprusscene.com/2013/11/13/cypr ... e-tragedy/
The CIA docs link that I had (doesn't work anymore) agrees with the last number.

Sotos wrote:Those articles come from a minority of Yes men/women who are trying to mislead people. And yes, we can reject any new similar plan. What is to stop me from voting "no" like last time? Yes, there might be consequences, but not even close enough to the consequences of accepting such a disastrous solution. Anastasiades knows this, which is why there will be no referendum again for any such solution


What’s your evidence that they are trying to mislead people??
Do you have any study proving the opposite?

And what makes you think it’s going to be similar to the Anan Plan? It has to be different or else it won’t be accepted. Plain simple. The Annan plan was disguised partition on the first place.
As things stand it seems it’s going to be much better than the Annan on the political and safety aspect and probably worse on the property and settlers issue.

Talk for yourself in saying "yes, we can reject any new similar plan".
I imply to you that we won’t and we will be given full explanation as to why by those who will serve it to us. Unless of course you expect to ever receive a plan that will set the Tcs at minority status in a unitary state.
You as an individual may do as you wish, but don’t give me the heroic bullshit that we will say no again and at the same time bear the consequences.
I have no idea what Anastasiades knows what his people will do, but be sure he won’t miss the chance to pass us a new plan as described above.

wrote: It is called democracy and by specifying that "political equality" does not equal "numerical equality" the UN clarifies that, with some exceptions, standard democratic rules apply. In a democracy you don't always get what serves the interests of your own group, but what is best for the overall population. By this I don't mean any decision will violate the rights of TCs, but "rights" and "interests" are two completely different things.


It’s called democracy in a Federal state. Not democracy in a Unitary state. It’s obvious you can’t distinguish between the two. However you are still avoiding the question.
I repeat:
Explain to me in what way you think the political equality (as defined and clarified by the UN) could ever be applied in a way that would not empower the GC community to force the TC community to accept measures against their interests.


As for the exceptions that’s something you invented yourself .The UN is very clear that there won’t be ANY exceptions in saying:

… effective participation in ALL organs and decisions of the Federal Government to safeguard in ensuring that the Federal Government will not be empowered to adopt measures against the interests of ONE community.

Also your trying to distinguish their "rights" from their "interests" is another invention of yours.
The UN has never distinguished between the two, it has in fact been very clear on both.

a)the rights--> effective participation in ALL organs…
b) their interests---> in ensuring that the Federal Government will not be empowered to adopt measures against the interests of ONE community
User avatar
Pyrpolizer
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12892
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: Political equality

Postby Lordo » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:29 pm

kurupetos wrote:
Lordo wrote:
Sotos wrote:Stop talking crap Vordo. Dektash never accepted the 13 points.

When you decide that you want the 1960 agreements let us know. When you reject those agreements and demand something completely different then anything we agreed to back then is null and void and you are just a minority as far as I am concerned.

lets hope majority of the population is not at your level of understaning. lets hear anastasiades suggest he wishes to retrun to 1960 and see what akinci will respond. ignore terggy.

it is so magnanemous of you to offer us back our veto in the roc. we really like that and appreciate your good gesture and we will rescipricate, onest gov.

Veto and other recipes for disaster will never be accepted again.

If you had brains, you wouldn't want this crap either. :roll:

i did not say i wanted it, sotos said i do not accept it and i told him i would accept such an offer and it was very kind of him to ovver to go back to 1960 agreement
as to being disaster, you are cluless. rather than makarios implementing the constitution he set about using the implementation to change the constirtution through the back door. of course it was going to be vetoed. the constitution was not vetoed or the government, the changes to them were becasue they were not agreed.

and yet in 1972 clerides and dengtash agreed to the 13 points and makarios vetoed it saying it is not acceptable as it still excluded enosis. can you believe that even after greek soldiers were trying to kill him he still wanted enosis.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 21561
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Walk on Swine walk on

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest