Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Insan, Viewpoint's views are well known. However personally I respect more the way Viewpoint is expressing his opinion than what you do. It seems to me you want exactly the same thing like him, you just like to disguise your words.

If you are so sure that TCs and GCs can not live together, then why don't you state clearly that what you want is partition, like Viewpoint does?

Anyways, back to my topic:

If TCs after the 5 years suspect that the GCs were simply pretending during those years and they are not honest, nothing can stop them for voting for partition in the referendum.

[insan]

Insan, Viewpoint's views are well known. However personally I respect more the way Viewpoint is expressing his opinion than what you do. It seems to me you want exactly the same thing like him, you just like to disguise your words.

If you are so sure that TCs and GCs can not live together, then why don't you state clearly that what you want is partition, like Viewpoint does?

hahahahaaah
Why should I disguise my words, Piratis? Tell me what will I gain by disguising my words? When you can't further your argument against my arguments; you tell the same things. You are so funny Piratis. Really tell me what will my gain by disguising my words? And tell me which RoC Turkey should restore constitutional order?

[Piratis]

[insan]

You have no idea?


Would you like Turkey to restore constitutional order how you wished? It would be excellent eh? How about restoration of constitutional order how TCs wished? Would you accept it? Or you would revolt against your TC brothers to kick them out of common parliament to oppress them to obbey your rule?


Which one Piratis? Don't disguise your words. Tell me what's on your mind. Don't evade answering me?

[Piratis]

There was only one "constitutional order" to be restored, because there was only one, unchanged, constidution. This is the order Turkey should have restored in 1960 instead of occupying 1/3rd of the country.

Tell me what will I gain by disguising my words?

You are trying to gain something like Annan plan, which gives you the partition that you want, EU, and our money at the same time.

[insan]

There was only one "constitutional order" to be restored, because there was only one, unchanged, constidution. This is the order Turkey should have restored in 1960 instead of occupying 1/3rd of the country.

Weren't/aren't GCs who exerted hard to get rid of 1960's constitutiional order. If 1960's constitutional order was what you wanted to be restored why did you exerted hard to get rid of it and caused a big catastrophe in Cayprus?

You are trying to gain something like Annan plan, which gives you the partition that you want, EU, and our money at the same time.

This is a funny and baseless prediction, Piratis.

[garbitsch]

The constitutional order was already destroyed in 1963, when Makarios attempted to take back the Constitutional rights of TCs and the Turkish Cypriots were forced to leave the parliament and other governement bureaucracies. This was followed by the partition of Nicosia, which was agreed by both G.Cs and T.Cs!!
The RoC was something not legitimate in the eyes of G.Cs and their leaders. If you want, we can still pretend that RoC was a functioning state, which in 1974 the Junta did an illegal coup and thus, followed by the Turkish invasion.

I would rather argue that, when Turkey had intervened the island, it should have occupied the whole territory and installed an interm government and urged for a new constitution, just like the US is doing in Iraq now. At least Turkey had a legal right to intervene, but US didn't.

[Piratis]

Anyways, this was a proposal for the future.
It was actually a proposal that would allow TCs to get partition if they wanted too! What else do you want??

It seems to me some of you can never be satisfied with anything except what you demand exactly.

[garbitsch]

Anyways, this was a proposal for the future.
It was actually a proposal that would allow TCs to get partition if they wanted too! What else do you want??

It seems to me some of you can never be satisfied with anything except what you demand exactly.

You wrote the proposal. An agreement should not be based on a proposal which was written only by one side. You should sit with another T.C and discuss, before writing proposals. Am I wrong?

[Piratis]

You wrote the proposal. An agreement should not be based on a proposal which was written only by one side. You should sit with another T.C and discuss, before writing proposals. Am I wrong?

This is why I posted it here. However it seems that some people like specific topics so much that they have to discuss them in all threads.
Can we for once stay on topic?