Murataga wrote:pitsilos-
Well, to a logical reader it actually answered both of the questions, but apparently you’ve had quite a difficult time comprehending it. I have to assume that it is either from a lack of intelligence or a lack of desire to accept a build of analytical argument presented with a clear analogy, or perhaps a bit of both. You pathetically asked:
well if we were talking about slavery you example explains it very well, but we are not are we?
Of course we are not speaking specifically about slavery. The slavery was given as an example. An example to show you that if the whole world (and I have explained it to you previously that in Cyprus it is not the whole world anymore) recognizes something, that doesn’t mean that it is just, that doesn’t mean that it is right and that surely doesn’t mean it is acceptable. If a person in fact committed a murder and a courtroom full of jurors found him NOT guilty because of a lack of evidence, or misrepresentation of the offended party, or interests of the jurors or etc. would that man not be guilty of murder? What would it mean for the whole world recognized him as NOT guilty? The U.N. passes hundreds of resolutions about hundreds of communal conflicts around the world. Do you believe that every single one of them are CORRECT, that every single one of them are JUST, that every single one of them are NEUTRAL passed without the interests of superpowers? Are you so confident about each and every one them as to bet your life on it?
And please don’t bother me with another premature post, implying that you still haven’t understood the answer, because the answer to BOTH of your questions will not and can not get any clearer, direct and simplified than this.
i like your example, kindergarden stuff, how old did you say you were?
i already answered your pathetic first responce but in your usual stupidity you ignored it only to come back with another ludicrous reply.
here is the answer to your first responce. you wanna wait until the un overturns all these resolutions, but again, and i am repeating here, your one track mind does not allow you to comprehend that the un is not in the business of being part of ethnic cleansing. I also gave you other examples more relevant to the cyprus proble, syria and iraq, when the world showed you that it will never be part of the bullshit you subscribe.
now can you atleast, intelligently, and i use the term intelligently losely here, have another go in answering both questions, again.
the first question is, and according to you, if it was deemed an illegal state and a hijacked one at that, how come then to this very date is still recognized as the only legal state on the island and a fully fledged member of the EU?
the second question is, where was turkey all this time as all the resolutions were condemning her, i mean one after the other? you saying she wasn't getting legal sound advice and trying to defend her self? or she was not invited to the party at the un?
I think the bulk of the resolutions were against Turkey and not the tcs
ps. maybe 3rd time lucky? one can only hope
ps the questions above are 2 separate questions that need 2 separate answers. but then again, i should never underestimate the power of stupidity in people in large groups.