Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

The National Guard is not a RoC constitutional army! It is a side-constitutional army! It is not an all Cypriot state army, but a Greek Cypriot one; that is why Armenians, Maronites and Turkish Cypriots are not compulsory recruited into! As we know, the 1960 constitution provides for an all Cypriot mixed army, composed by all communities in a ratio of 60:40, between GCs and TCs!

Damn I miss out again. Can I please be adopted by a maronite Cypriot family?

Wiil an ex-pat TC family do?

[Kifeas]

Ok here it stands. I hate the idea of an army. An institution build on taking human ife. I reckon that is prety fucked and cannot be celebrated

No problem Humanist, you are free to allow the Turks without resistance! However, do not afterwards call it a rape!

[halil]

i am not satisfied with above answers.

Dear Halil Bayrak, first of all, before rushing like a tele-guided missile to decide that you are not satisfied with the above "answers," please ask yourself whether your knowledge of English is enough to have allowed you to understand what I have written in the first place!

If not (most likely,) then wait until you learn better English, and then read again what I said, and then proceed to tell us whether you are satisfied or not!

Dear KİFO'ş i do understand every line of it.
Those excuses does not clear your unbiased claims.Before 1974 there wasn't any Turkish Army occupation But National Guard army formed before 1974 . Against to who ?

1959 treaty clearly says:

14. Compulsory military service may only be instituted with the agreement of the President and the Vice-President of the Republic of Cyprus. Cyprus shall have an army of 2,000 men, of whom 60 per cent. shall be Greek and 40 per cent. Turkish. The security forces (gendarmerie and police) shall have a complement of 2,000 men, which may be reduced or increased with the agreement of both the President and the Vice-President The security forces shall be composed as to 70 per cent. of Greeks and as to 30 per cent. of Turks. However, for an initial period this percentage may be raised to a maximum of 40 per cent. of Turks (and consequently reduced to 60 per cent. of Greeks) in order not to discharge those Turks now serving in the police, apart from the auxiliary police.

[humanist]

GG I do not hate the police...... do I believe that in Australia we are experiencing an increase in police state yes. How do I visuaise a world without an army yes. i can visualise a peaceful world and a free Cyprus. Am I a juxdaposition yes I am. GG I am guilty as charged. Here it goes governments are about power and control and beefits of individuals and their networks. And your government is one of the most corupt govos I have come to know. However I love the loud confident Americans

[denizaksulu]

Ok here it stands. I hate the idea of an army. An institution build on taking human ife. I reckon that is prety fucked and cannot be celebrated

No problem Humanist, you are free to allow the Turks to fuck you without resistance! However, do not afterwards call it a rape!

Kifeas, I understand your pessimism, but I somehow dont see any one attacking unless provoked (militarily) by the other. What our friends are asking (me thinks) is demilitarisation. (under the watchful eye of the EU ofcourse).
Regards

[Kifeas]

i am not satisfied with above answers.

Dear Halil Bayrak, first of all, before rushing like a tele-guided missile to decide that you are not satisfied with the above "answers," please ask yourself whether your knowledge of English is enough to have allowed you to understand what I have written in the first place!

If not (most likely,) then wait until you learn better English, and then read again what I said, and then proceed to tell us whether you are satisfied or not!

Dear KİFO'ş i do understand every line of it.
Those excuses does not clear your unbiased claims.Before 1974 there wasn't any Turkish Army occupation But National Guard army formed before 1974 . Against to who ?

Oh really???

You mean Turkey has not been repeatedly threatening with an invasion, since 1963, and in fact it attempted to do so already 3 times before 1974? You mean Turkey was not plotting (with maps) a military landing and an occupation in Cyprus, already since 1958, within the McMilan plan's framework? You mean Turkey has not been conducting frequent (twice a year) sea and air landing exercises on the soil of Turkey, with Cyprus as the target scenario, already since 1964? You mean Turkey was not upgrading its sea landing capabilities, or in fact it was doing so but with the aim of landing in Egypt, instead of Cyprus? You also mean to say that those maps found in the possession of TCs in 1971, showing the alternative sea landing spots either in Bogaz (Famagusta bay,) Kyrenia or Morfou bay, where maps for the landing of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, but not of Turkey? Do you mean the plot the GC authorities uncovered in 1972, through TC informers, for the provoking by the TMT of intercommunal fighting in the area of Lefka and the subsequent counter-reaction of the NG, in order to justify a Turkish invasion; were all fake plans and .or information?

Really???

How stupid we were!!!

[Kifeas]

Ok here it stands. I hate the idea of an army. An institution build on taking human ife. I reckon that is prety fucked and cannot be celebrated

No problem Humanist, you are free to allow the Turks to fuck you without resistance! However, do not afterwards call it a rape!

Kifeas, I understand your pessimism, but I somehow dont see any one attacking unless provoked (militarily) by the other. What our friends are asking (me thinks) is demilitarisation. (under the watchful eye of the EU ofcourse).
Regards

Our friends, I am sorry to say, are only engaging themselves in "aerogamies" because Turkey will never voluntarily accept demilitarization in Cyprus, not even after we completely dissolve the NG first!

[halil]

i am not satisfied with above answers.

Dear Halil Bayrak, first of all, before rushing like a tele-guided missile to decide that you are not satisfied with the above "answers," please ask yourself whether your knowledge of English is enough to have allowed you to understand what I have written in the first place!

If not (most likely,) then wait until you learn better English, and then read again what I said, and then proceed to tell us whether you are satisfied or not!

Dear KİFO'ş i do understand every line of it.
Those excuses does not clear your unbiased claims.Before 1974 there wasn't any Turkish Army occupation But National Guard army formed before 1974 . Against to who ?

Oh really???

You mean Turkey has not been repeatedly threatening with an invasion, since 1963, and in fact it attempted to do so already 3 times before 1974? You mean Turkey was not plotting (with maps) a military landing and an occupation in Cyprus, already since 1958, within the McMilan plan's framework? You mean Turkey has not been conducting frequent (twice a year) sea and air landing exercises on the soil of Turkey, with Cyprus as the target scenario, already since 1964? You mean Turkey was not upgrading its sea landing capabilities, or in fact it was doing so but with the aim of landing in Egypt, instead of Cyprus? You also mean to say that those maps found in the possession of TCs in 1971, showing the alternative sea landing spots either in Bogaz (Famagusta bay,) Kyrenia or Morfou bay, where maps for the landing of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, but not of Turkey? Do you mean the plot the GC authorities uncovered in 1972, through TC informers, for the provoking by the TMT of intercommunal fighting in the area of Lefka and the subsequent counter-reaction of the NG, in order to justify a Turkish invasion; were all fake plans and .or information?

Really???

How stupid we were?

you see to change the subject u understand my english.
my point is National Guard is not the army of the ROC. That's all.
GADALAVİS.

[DT.]

i am not satisfied with above answers.

Dear Halil Bayrak, first of all, before rushing like a tele-guided missile to decide that you are not satisfied with the above "answers," please ask yourself whether your knowledge of English is enough to have allowed you to understand what I have written in the first place!

If not (most likely,) then wait until you learn better English, and then read again what I said, and then proceed to tell us whether you are satisfied or not!

Dear KİFO'ş i do understand every line of it.
Those excuses does not clear your unbiased claims.Before 1974 there wasn't any Turkish Army occupation But National Guard army formed before 1974 . Against to who ?

Oh really???

You mean Turkey has not been repeatedly threatening with an invasion, since 1963, and in fact it attempted to do so already 3 times before 1974? You mean Turkey was not plotting (with maps) a military landing and an occupation in Cyprus, already since 1958, within the McMilan plan's framework? You mean Turkey has not been conducting frequent (twice a year) sea and air landing exercises on the soil of Turkey, with Cyprus as the target scenario, already since 1964? You mean Turkey was not upgrading its sea landing capabilities, or in fact it was doing so but with the aim of landing in Egypt, instead of Cyprus? You also mean to say that those maps found in the possession of TCs in 1971, showing the alternative sea landing spots either in Bogaz (Famagusta bay,) Kyrenia or Morfou bay, where maps for the landing of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, but not of Turkey? Do you mean the plot the GC authorities uncovered in 1972, through TC informers, for the provoking by the TMT of intercommunal fighting in the area of Lefka and the subsequent counter-reaction of the NG, in order to justify a Turkish invasion; were all fake plans and .or information?

Really???

How stupid we were?

you see to change the subject u understand my english.
my point is National Guard is not the army of the ROC. That's all.
GADALAVİS.

he didn't dispute that Halil.

[denizaksulu]

i am not satisfied with above answers.

Dear Halil Bayrak, first of all, before rushing like a tele-guided missile to decide that you are not satisfied with the above "answers," please ask yourself whether your knowledge of English is enough to have allowed you to understand what I have written in the first place!

If not (most likely,) then wait until you learn better English, and then read again what I said, and then proceed to tell us whether you are satisfied or not!

Dear KİFO'ş i do understand every line of it.
Those excuses does not clear your unbiased claims.Before 1974 there wasn't any Turkish Army occupation But National Guard army formed before 1974 . Against to who ?

Oh really???

You mean Turkey has not been repeatedly threatening with an invasion, since 1963, and in fact it attempted to do so already 3 times before 1974? You mean Turkey was not plotting (with maps) a military landing and an occupation in Cyprus, already since 1958, within the McMilan plan's framework? You mean Turkey has not been conducting frequent (twice a year) sea and air landing exercises on the soil of Turkey, with Cyprus as the target scenario, already since 1964? You mean Turkey was not upgrading its sea landing capabilities, or in fact it was doing so but with the aim of landing in Egypt, instead of Cyprus? You also mean to say that those maps found in the possession of TCs in 1971, showing the alternative sea landing spots either in Bogaz (Famagusta bay,) Kyrenia or Morfou bay, where maps for the landing of the Phoenicians in Cyprus, but not of Turkey? Do you mean the plot the GC authorities uncovered in 1972, through TC informers, for the provoking by the TMT of intercommunal fighting in the area of Lefka and the subsequent counter-reaction of the NG, in order to justify a Turkish invasion; were all fake plans and .or information?

Really???

How stupid we were!!!

Kifeas, I understand your sentiments here. Do you really believe that taking Greece as a example, does not have any contingency plans with a view of defensive or offensive plans at the ready, with regards to any of its neighbours?. If not they behave foolhardy.