Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

It is not the kind of thing that needs evidence Viewpoint. The schedules were parallel agreements between the armed forces of both sides. These were not in the main text of the Annan plan, as they were separate agreements between the military.

It is not the kind of thing that is in dispute. The Greek Army agreed to the weapons schedule even though many individual officers objected. The net effect was to guarantee superior firepower to the Turkish side. And the question was why? If force levels were equal and peace signed why need so much superior weaponry?

Reports were published in the Greek press in the days following the Annan plan rejection. The whole business reminds us of the secret annexes presented to the Serbs to sign by Madeleine Allbright. We did not know at the time that NATO demanded that the Serbs surrender all their airports and all their communications to NATO unconditionally. If we had known we would not have condemned the Serbs.

[Daemon]

I am talking about the added schedules to the Annan plan which define the type of armamemnts each side was to have if the plan was accepted. The Greeks could have 50 caliber machine guns the Turks 20 mm cannon, and the list goes on like that. YOu cannot read it because it is not a public document, it was leaked to the press after the rejection of the plan, I am guessing by some officers of the Greek army. Research before you prejudge.

The Greek forces were to be outgunned on the island for years and years, asshole, stand there for years like sitting ducks. Your soldiers not ours.

This is the same faddist who was speaking about the black whores that the Cypriot politicians was fucking in exchange with the yes vote, if this is not mental sickness then what the fuck is?

And is not his problem, the main problem is the ridiculous media like Simerini that are living in the Orthodoxonationalistic hell with the scary demons.

The light arms where controlled from UN and of course no one could say no if the Greeks had a reason to bring guns with equal power while the human power it was equal.

At least while you are pushing your self’s, bring some reasonable arguments (there can be arguments for no but there are not demons) and cut the demonology and the fairy tales with the bud witches.

And this chaos in the Cyprus problem starting from the rejection of the plan is because this hilarious government with this sick person that no one knows what the fuck wants and no one can come to a conclusion from his incoherently lies and of course no one is taking him seriously anymore. Even if you want division say it while you can (like Oranos says and he have a point while your people are racists) because there are many kinds of division and an agreed division through negotiation could save you from much worst. If you can’t say what the fuck you want no one is able to help or even to understand you.

And of course if you say what you don’t want BBF it means what you want division because there is no other kind of solution that can be implemented in the present situation and the most important is what you have accepted and sign for the BBF starting from Makarios and ending with Papadopoulos and the last agreement where he sign again for the specific form of solution.

This issue is about your and your kids future is not some stupid game to score points for your self enjoinment.

[Nikitas]

Daemon,

Read Ethnos and Elefthrotypia from the days after the Annan plan. You will find the above fully docimented. Read it and piss off. Eleftherotypia was for the Annan plan from day one, unlikely to have falsified reports to please me.

The Turks wanted the mainland Greek Amry at their mercy and that is why they insisted on having guaranteed superior firepower. The risk was not on Cypriots, it was on mainland Greece.

[Daemon]

And why you have all this fears? What a war could bring for them?

The plan could not come to dead end because of its unorthodox forced nature where for example in misunderstandings the 3 foreign judges could put an end to the problem and the secession was forbidden by specific notions of the plan. And a war in this circumstances where a reason could not be found was going to be out of any reason and the Turks were going to collect a big western dick in all levels.

In this ridiculous scenario they could go back to the situation before the plan and you were going to have more ground and for that they were going to say bye Europe for ever and you were going to keep being the victim in everyone’s eyes and you were about to keep all your friends, do you think what even if there was a reason for a war could America accept such evolvement? Or do you think what Europe was going to accept the TC’s like they are doing now?

You have much more to loose if a solution will not be found in the next few years and of course in the scenario of the agreed division I’ve said above you are about to loose what you were loosing in your nightmares in the Anan plan.

Read Ethnos and Elefthrotypia from the days after the Annan plan. You will find the above fully docimented. Read it and piss off. Eleftherotypia was for the Annan plan from day one, unlikely to have falsified reports to please me.

The Turks wanted the mainland Greek Amry at their mercy and that is why they insisted on having guaranteed superior firepower. The risk was not on Cypriots, it was on mainland Greece.

Bring links at least.

[Nikitas]

OK if everything was fine and dandy and the foreign judges would solve all problems why did the Turks insist on outgunning the Greeks? Dont you see the point? They wanted to be ready for the time when the dispute would give them a chance to complete what they started in 1974.

There are no links- just look up the newspaper files for those days- Ethnos site is www.e-go.gr I dont know the Eleftherotypia URL.

[Daemon]

OK if everything was fine and dandy and the foreign judges would solve all problems why did the Turks insist on outgunning the Greeks? Dont you see the point?

Yes and the Pope is the antichrist I can see your point.

They wanted to be ready for the time when the dispute would give them a chance to complete what they started in 1974.

And what was that? To take over the whole Cyprus?

If they wanted they couldn’t? And how they could through the Anan plan in European ground where they couldn’t where Cyprus was third world?

I’m afraid what if you mean what they were going to bring division is pathetic for the persons that they are pretending the patriots while you are about to bring a division with out any ground exchange and with many dangerous consequences (where in some years you could be a minority in the island) and with out even the ability to go for a war while the Turkish powers in Cyprus can take over the island in few days where you were about to have the same power and I insist what there is not one in a million that UN could say not to equal arm power.

And of course the division scenario and the recognition of TRNC were not valid because no one could recognize them after such ridiculous evolvement and they were going to be in the same situation that they was in the past with less ground.

Of course all this is simply bullshits because the Turks even in that unthought-of scenario they could not do a shit with out the help of the European TC’s that is ridiculous for someone to claim what they was going to give away their European identity and the benefits coming with for some nationalistic Turkish bullshits. And even if they are stupids because they are Cypriots and it is

There are no links- just look up the newspaper files for those days- Ethnos site is www.e-go.gr I dont know the Eleftherotypia URL.

Yes very nice link and very serious subject, it’s like the black whores story.

[Kifeas]

Deamon, the Annan plan was rejected (and rightfully so) because it was an arrangement based on a text full of constructive ambiguities, which would allow the Turks to rightfully claim later on that it was a form of partnership -not between the two communities as they are defined and understood within the 1960 constitution; but instead a partnership between two “legitimately pre-existing” separate territorial entities (states,) with their own separate people (nations!) The fact that the settlers, who are not part of the TC community as such but only so-called citizens of the “TRNC,” were allowed to vote in the referendum as constituent members on behalf of one of the two sides (the TC one,) is the most sticking evidence to the above claim!

The Turks did not wait too long to reveal their intentions as to how they would have interpreted the new state of affairs that would have been established by our own signature, via the Annan plan. Already, a week before the April 2004 referendums -and this only upon the insistence of Papadopoulos, they made public the TC “Constituent State’s” constitution. Right from the start (preamble and article 1 of this text,) it becomes evident where the Turks were coming from! Read it and you will understand what I am talking about. In a nutshell, Annan plan, in a disguised and stealthy way and by virtue of “virgin birth,” introduced the notion that the new state of affairs that will emerge, will be one of a partnership between two already legitimately existing entities, with their own territories and people (nation-states,) and not one between the two communities of Cyprus as they are recognised under the 1960 agreements! In other words, a vindication of all the since 1974 (otherwise illegal and /or illegitimate) Turkish "fait accomplices!"

Now, if you personally have no problem with this idea (which Papadopoulos rightfully identified as one deepening and institutionalising partition –since the institutionalised splitting of the Cypriot people into two communities in 1960 now deepens further and becomes an institutionalised splitting into two separate “nation-states” -to become partners;) 76% of the GC society does have a problem!

The problem with the Annan plan was its very philosophy, more than with anything else!

[Daemon]

Deamon, the Annan plan was rejected (and rightfully so)

Yes I can see that, every day passing is getting better and better. Now your great leader will bring you a European solution.

because it was an arrangement based on a text full of constructive ambiguities, which would allow the Turks to rightfully claim later on that it was a form of partnership -not between the two communities as they are defined and understood within the 1960 constitution; but instead a partnership between two “legitimately pre-existing” separate territorial entities (states,) with their own separate people (nations!) The fact that the settlers, who are not part of the TC community as such but only so-called citizens of the “TRNC,” were allowed to vote in the referendum as constituent members on behalf of one of the two sides (the TC one,) is the most sticking evidence to the above claim!

There was only one nation like in every federation.

When and after what evolvement they could claim that you say?

After a misunderstanding?

It could not lead to a dead end.

After a war?

They were about to take from the 3 the larger.

The plan did not giving them any chances for secession and this is the main reason that Dektash and Papadopoulos did not want the plan and that’s why they made all this secret meetings. Because there ware not a way out of the plan.

I do not know if the settlers were allowed to vote but if they did it’s more possible that the most of them were voting no for many reasons.

The Turks did not wait too long to reveal their intentions as to how they would have interpreted the new state of affairs that would have been established by our own signature, via the Annan plan. Already, a week before the April 2004 referendums -and this only upon the insistence of Papadopoulos, they made public the TC “Constituent State’s” constitution. Right from the start (preamble and article 1 of this text,) it becomes evident where the Turks were coming from! Read it and you will understand what I am talking about. In a nutshell, Annan plan, in a disguised and stealthy way and by virtue of “virgin birth,” introduced the notion that the new state of affairs that will emerge, will be one of a partnership between two already legitimately existing entities, with their own territories and people (nation-states,) and not one between the two communities of Cyprus as they are recognised under the 1960 agreements! In other words, a vindication of all the since 1974 (otherwise illegal and /or illegitimate) Turkish "fait accomplices!"

To answer on that bring me some parts of their constitution that lead to what you are saying.

Of course there is not logic in something like that like I’ve said above.

Now, if you personally have no problem with this idea (which Papadopoulos rightfully identified as one deepening and institutionalising partition –since the institutionalised splitting of the Cypriot people into two communities in 1960 now deepens further and becomes an institutionalised splitting into two separate “nation-states” -to become partners;) 76% of the GC society does have a problem!

The problem with the Annan plan was its very philosophy, more than with anything else!

And the 76% vote for your reasons, for Piratis reasons, or for Akel reasons?

There was not such a case but let’s suppose what it was, do you think what after one or two decades they will not accomplish a much worst situation (even from an agreed division that no one have the guts to ask for) ?

Like I’ve said in the other topic, politics is about choosing the bud from the worst. TPap choose the worst and he had a chance to point his worries about the plan (let’s forget his bullshits in the crying speech) and he tried to bury the plan in the whole and take the Cyprus problem in 0 situation where Turkey also have taken the Cyprus passport for their accession in EU and there is nothing to negotiate with and now only if the foreigners want but mostly can there is some chances to solve the problem that is in the worst days after the invasion.

If you truly believe what Papadopoulos know what he is doing is your problem and you should vote him if you believe what the isolation he cause can lead anywhere. If you want to give some hope to Cyprus you have two options: 1) Run for president I can ensure you what you are more capable and you want a solution and you care for your country more than your self and your divine thoughts. 2) Vote your partner Christofias because in the today situation even a communist can have better results in Europe than TPap.

[Kifeas]

Deamon, the Annan plan was rejected (and rightfully so)

Yes I can see that, every day passing is getting better and better. Now your great leader will bring you a European solution.

The term “European solution” is not in Papadopoulos vocabulary! He never used such a term! The term is only used by “EuroKo” party! There is no such a thing like a “European solution!” There is only a solution based on international legality, legitimacy, human and peoples rights, and on the historical realities of this country which are not the “historical realities” of the Turks and Talat that only go back 30-40 years! The history of this country is much longer than 30-40 years! There is also a solution based on surrender, capitulation, expediency an on the “might is right!” I choose the first, you choose the second! That is our main difference!

because it was an arrangement based on a text full of constructive ambiguities, which would allow the Turks to rightfully claim later on that it was a form of partnership -not between the two communities as they are defined and understood within the 1960 constitution; but instead a partnership between two “legitimately pre-existing” separate territorial entities (states,) with their own separate people (nations!) The fact that the settlers, who are not part of the TC community as such but only so-called citizens of the “TRNC,” were allowed to vote in the referendum as constituent members on behalf of one of the two sides (the TC one,) is the most sticking evidence to the above claim!

There was only one nation like in every federation.

Not it wasn’t! There were two separate citizenships! One so called external and one internal! The internal citizenship of the TCCS was automatically reserved exclusively by the members of the TC community and the mainland Turkish settlers, who were all together elevated into a separate people! Even the GCs that would have returned inside the boundaries of the TCCS, would not have obtained the status of internal citizens of that state, but only the status of residents, just like the British and other EU nationals now have in the south! To have been able to obtain the status of internal citizens of that state, they should have gone through a “naturalisation” process, as if they were immigrants entering into a foreign country, seeking citizenship from it after they would comply with all the requirements, apply and then approved for one by the owners of the state, i.e. the TC people! Is this how it is in all other federations? No it isn’t!

I do not know if the settlers were allowed to vote but if they did it’s more possible that the most of them were voting no for many reasons.

Deamon, how you can come here and play the expert, when you do not even know if the settlers were allowed to vote and that in fact the majority of them voted “yes” on Turkey’s instructions, is beyond me to comprehend! At least do not pretend to be one that knows everything, if you are missing such key knowledge and information!

The Turks did not wait too long to reveal their intentions as to how they would have interpreted the new state of affairs that would have been established by our own signature, via the Annan plan. Already, a week before the April 2004 referendums -and this only upon the insistence of Papadopoulos, they made public the TC “Constituent State’s” constitution. Right from the start (preamble and article 1 of this text,) it becomes evident where the Turks were coming from! Read it and you will understand what I am talking about. In a nutshell, Annan plan, in a disguised and stealthy way and by virtue of “virgin birth,” introduced the notion that the new state of affairs that will emerge, will be one of a partnership between two already legitimately existing entities, with their own territories and people (nation-states,) and not one between the two communities of Cyprus as they are recognised under the 1960 agreements! In other words, a vindication of all the since 1974 (otherwise illegal and /or illegitimate) Turkish "fait accomplices!"

To answer on that bring me some parts of their constitution that lead to what you are saying.

Oh, you now want me to bring you parts of the TCCS constitution which was an annex to the Annan plan, to which you voted “yes” because you “knew” it was a “good” plan! Before you claimed you have studied and analysed the Annan plan so well, that you know everything and that you are certain Papadopoulos cheated the GCs! Now you do not know what was in the constitutions of the two states, neither you know were to find them!

Well, here you are:

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE TURKISH CYPRIOT STATE
PREAMBLE
We, the Turkish Cypriot people, bearing in mind that the territorial integrity, security and constitutional order of the Turkish Cypriot State is guaranteed under the Treaty of Guarantee, sovereignly proclaim this Constitution by approval at referendum of 20 April 2004 as the Constitution of the Turkish Cypriot State.

PART I
General Principles
The Form and Characteristics of the Turkish Cypriot State
Article 1
The Turkish Cypriot State, as one of the two Constituent States of the United Cyprus Republic, which is based on the political equality, bi-zonality and equal status of the two Constituent States, representing the distinct identity of Turkish Cypriots and their equal political status in a bizonal partnership. It is a secular state based on the principles of human rights, democracy, representative republican government, social justice and the supremacy of law.

Do you see nothing wrong in the above two paragraphs? Is the above a constitution accommodating the GC refugees and any other GC that would have returned and settled back into the northern part of his country, out of which they were illegally expelled 30 years ago? In my eyes, it is a constitution that makes the assumption that the northern 30% of the territory of Cyprus, i.e. the area that would have been under the administration of the TCCS, belongs to the Turkish Cypriot people (notice the use of the term people instead of the term community,) and only them in their ethnic identity can do what they want in that part of Cyprus (sovereignly,) as if they are now the absolute owners of that part of Cyprus! Is this how it is in all other federations? No it isn’t! Where are the civil rights of all the permanent residents of that part of Cyprus, if it says that the state represents only “the distinct identity of Turkish Cypriots?”

[miltiades]

Kifeas , this guy is a pretender or to put it mildly an ignorant , misinformed self indulgent smart ass on an ego trip , usual trip for such characters , entering into a discussion with this individual only helps to inflate his postulated position on the Cyprob.