Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

You got a tick or something? You trying to convince me that on the one hand we got nothing to worry about from the Turksh army and when i show you violations your argument is Tit for Tat?

I said that they are there to defend us and if you then go into the buffer zone and try to take parts that you are not supposed to then we will defend ourselves...Your tactics were to do exactly that so why should we let you down... Know do you know what Tit for Tat means....

Let me put this simply. The land you occupied in Strovillia was further south of the cease fire line. That poor chap living there did not just plant himself there. He has every right to be there as I do in Strovolos.

If they advanced to him then what stops them from advancing a few 100 or 1000 metres more?

This is your protection? Only if you're the Cosa Nostra!

Got any maps...Everything I read says it was in the Buffer zone....

[zan]

The report notes that the Turkish forces and Turkish Cypriot security forces "moved forward of their ceasefire line at Strovillia and have since controlled the access of UNFICYP to its post in this small hamlet, which is inhabited by Greek Cypriots". "Since October the Turkish forces have prevented UNFICYP from moving along the Famagusta - Dherinia road", it adds.

In the buffer zone

[Kikapu]

Eric,

While I support TRNC independence, the presence of 40,000 troops lends credence to the folks claiming that the troops are an occupation force, rather than a protective force. Despite any Status of Forces agreement between TRNC and Turkey, ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels. Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

Strategically, given Turkey's proximity to Cyprus, maintaining large numbers of troops seems superflous. Five to ten thousand troops would be more than enough of a deterrent. Forty Thousand is overkill, IMHO.

Expatkiwi,

While I support TRNC independence,

ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels.

Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

I had not realized before, that the South Korea had declared Independence from North Korea, and that is the reason why the US military is there.??? I learn something on the forum every day.!!!


Expatkiwi, I couldn't help but notice your usage of the word "Independence" few times in your post.

Let me ask you few question.

Are you an American by birth, or a naturalized citizen, like myself.

You said before that you live in California, is that correct.??

Can you tell me what is your understanding of the word "Independence" means, and who qualifies to be "Independent" and under what circumstances and criteria. In another words, what are the conditions need to be, in able to declare "Independence".

Once you get back to me with your answers, I will let you know as to why I have asked those questions.

Thanks.

[Expatkiwi]

Eric,

While I support TRNC independence, the presence of 40,000 troops lends credence to the folks claiming that the troops are an occupation force, rather than a protective force. Despite any Status of Forces agreement between TRNC and Turkey, ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels. Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

Strategically, given Turkey's proximity to Cyprus, maintaining large numbers of troops seems superflous. Five to ten thousand troops would be more than enough of a deterrent. Forty Thousand is overkill, IMHO.

Expatkiwi,

While I support TRNC independence,

ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels.

Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

I had not realized before, that the South Korea had declared Independence from North Korea, and that is the reason why the US military is there.??? I learn something on the forum every day.!!!


Expatkiwi, I couldn't help but notice your usage of the word "Independence" few times in your post.

Let me ask you few question.

Are you an American by birth, or a naturalized citizen, like myself.

You said before that you live in California, is that correct.??

Can you tell me what is your understanding of the word "Independence" means, and who qualifies to be "Independent" and under what circumstances and criteria. In another words, what are the conditions need to be, in able to declare "Independence".

Once you get back to me with your answers, I will let you know as to why I have asked those questions.

Thanks.

I'm a naturalized US Citizen. And yes, I do live in California. To my mind, 'Independence' is a status of a nation with allegiance to its own government. In order to meet independence, a country must have an established infrastructure, legal institutions, financial autonomy, and the sovereign right to deal with other countries - and vice versa.

I mentioned South Korea because the North derides it as a US Puppet State. Had the USA maintained large numbers of troops, it would have indeed looked like an occupying power. However, the smaller numbbers help keep a powerful deterrent on the north.

[Eric dayi]

Eric,

While I support TRNC independence, the presence of 40,000 troops lends credence to the folks claiming that the troops are an occupation force, rather than a protective force. Despite any Status of Forces agreement between TRNC and Turkey, ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels. Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

Strategically, given Turkey's proximity to Cyprus, maintaining large numbers of troops seems superflous. Five to ten thousand troops would be more than enough of a deterrent. Forty Thousand is overkill, IMHO.

Dean, I believe I have already answered your query about this subject in another thread a few weeks ago.

The 40,00 troops have kept the peace in Cyprus since 1974 and that's good enough for me and every single Turkish Cypriot who survived the genocide attempt on us TCs by the Greek/GC duo.

Do you remember GR's posting in ATCA's forum about the strength of the Greek/GC forces in Cyprus and the strength of the combination of TCs and the Turkish Army? If you do then you'll know why it is necessary to keep the 40,00 strong Turkish Army in the TRNC.

[Marz]

You got a tick or something? You trying to convince me that on the one hand we got nothing to worry about from the Turksh army and when i show you violations your argument is Tit for Tat?

I said that they are there to defend us and if you then go into the buffer zone and try to take parts that you are not supposed to then we will defend ourselves...Your tactics were to do exactly that so why should we let you down... Know do you know what Tit for Tat means....

So ZANNIBOY seems like you are saying you have to defend yourselfs, the way you say that is, you and the army, are you in the army Zan obviously you are liar and you really are a full blownTurk from the Motherfucker land.

tit for tat hey i hope you dont mid we come and take over your village Zaniboy.

if you guys are living there peacfully and like it where you are why are you here desperate for a solution if you really are happy there you wont be coming to us to try bragain for anything, you wanted 38% of the island and you want us to help look after you. what a joke. fend for yourselfs. why do you want anything to do with us its clear you want partition but you also want us to help you get it and support you financially and economically and give you free land plus recognition as a country. what a joke , your here just to stir and cause trouble.

[Kikapu]

I'm a naturalized US Citizen. And yes, I do live in California. To my mind, 'Independence' is a status of a nation with allegiance to its own government. In order to meet independence, a country must have an established infrastructure, legal institutions, financial autonomy, and the sovereign right to deal with other countries - and vice versa.

I mentioned South Korea because the North derides it as a US Puppet State. Had the USA maintained large numbers of troops, it would have indeed looked like an occupying power. However, the smaller numbbers help keep a powerful deterrent on the north.

Good. You have given me what Independence means, so how does the "TRNC" qualifies as an "Independent Country" when it cannot meet most of what you have described above. But more importantly, you have not explained who qualifies to declare Independence.

Let make some comparisons and see if they make sense to you.

You live in the Great State of California, as I had done so for 25 years. Tell me, can the American Mexicans living in California declare Independence from the USA one day, by simply taking over the lower 1/3rd of California so that they can be close to Tijuana and send all non American Mexicans to the remaining 2/3rds of the State just like that. I'm not even going to mention the fact, that half of California belonged to Mexico up until 1848. So, in this scenario, would you support the American Mexicans Independence from California and the USA. I could of course also use the Black Americans taking over Georgia to declare Independence from the USA. Or the Chinese in China Town or the Gays in Castro District, both communities located in San Francisco, along with many other nationalities who have been abused and needing their own Independence. Would you also support these peoples "rights" to declare Independence from the USA. After all, all of these people one time or another, and some for generations have been persecuted by the European Americans (whites). If you do, then you are also right to support the "TRNC Independence".

I just wanted to know if you understood the land distribution between the TC's and the GC's, that it was not as you see today, nicely packaged in two large parcels and each one community has lived in that parcel of land all their lives and history, and have declared Independence. No, every Cypriot TC's and GC's has lived all over Cyprus, some in mixed villages and some pure TC or GC villages, just like the American Mexicans, and Blacks, and others, who live all over America. The fact that the "TRNC" is based on land that was taken away by force from other citizens of Cyprus, may well be the reason as to why the "TRNC" is not recognised by anyone except the country who has used the force, Turkey. So, if your acceptance of the "TRNC's" Independence is genuine, which has not given them what you stated as to what Independence means, you are now ready to lose the lower 1/3rd of California to American Mexicans, while you are forced to leave your home in LA, and be forced to be a refugee in San Francisco.

Look on the bright side Expatkiwi, you could have ended up in Kansas, I guess.

[Expatkiwi]

I'm a naturalized US Citizen. And yes, I do live in California. To my mind, 'Independence' is a status of a nation with allegiance to its own government. In order to meet independence, a country must have an established infrastructure, legal institutions, financial autonomy, and the sovereign right to deal with other countries - and vice versa.

I mentioned South Korea because the North derides it as a US Puppet State. Had the USA maintained large numbers of troops, it would have indeed looked like an occupying power. However, the smaller numbbers help keep a powerful deterrent on the north.

Good. You have given me what Independence means, so how does the "TRNC" qualifies as an "Independent Country" when it cannot meet most of what you have described above. But more importantly, you have not explained who qualifies to declare Independence.

Let make some comparisons and see if they make sense to you.

You live in the Great State of California, as I had done so for 25 years. Tell me, can the American Mexicans living in California declare Independence from the USA one day, by simply taking over the lower 1/3rd of California so that they can be close to Tijuana and send all non American Mexicans to the remaining 2/3rds of the State just like that. I'm not even going to mention the fact, that half of California belonged to Mexico up until 1848. So, in this scenario, would you support the American Mexicans Independence from California and the USA. I could of course also use the Black Americans taking over Georgia to declare Independence from the USA. Or the Chinese in China Town or the Gays in Castro District, both communities located in San Francisco, along with many other nationalities who have been abused and needing their own Independence. Would you also support these peoples "rights" to declare Independence from the USA. After all, all of these people one time or another, and some for generations have been persecuted by the European Americans (whites). If you do, then you are also right to support the "TRNC Independence".

I just wanted to know if you understood the land distribution between the TC's and the GC's, that it was not as you see today, nicely packaged in two large parcels and each one community has lived in that parcel of land all their lives and history, and have declared Independence. No, every Cypriot TC's and GC's has lived all over Cyprus, some in mixed villages and some pure TC or GC villages, just like the American Mexicans, and Blacks, and others, who live all over America. The fact that the "TRNC" is based on land that was taken away by force from other citizens of Cyprus, may well be the reason as to why the "TRNC" is not recognised by anyone except the country who has used the force, Turkey. So, if your acceptance of the "TRNC's" Independence is genuine, which has not given them what you stated as to what Independence means, you are now ready to lose the lower 1/3rd of California to American Mexicans, while you are forced to leave your home in LA, and be forced to be a refugee in San Francisco.

Look on the bright side Expatkiwi, you could have ended up in Kansas, I guess.

But I don't have ruby red slippers....

Anyway, this is an interesting comparison you have given me. I don't buy it though. I do believe in self-determination, and considering what the Turkish Cypriots have suffered between 1963 and 1974, partition is the only answer IMHO. What is wrong with that?

[Expatkiwi]

Eric,

While I support TRNC independence, the presence of 40,000 troops lends credence to the folks claiming that the troops are an occupation force, rather than a protective force. Despite any Status of Forces agreement between TRNC and Turkey, ligitimacy of independence does depend upon appropriate troop levels. Thats one reason why USA maintains a relatively small number of troops in South Korea, compared with the ROK military.

Strategically, given Turkey's proximity to Cyprus, maintaining large numbers of troops seems superflous. Five to ten thousand troops would be more than enough of a deterrent. Forty Thousand is overkill, IMHO.

Dean, I believe I have already answered your query about this subject in another thread a few weeks ago.

The 40,00 troops have kept the peace in Cyprus since 1974 and that's good enough for me and every single Turkish Cypriot who survived the genocide attempt on us TCs by the Greek/GC duo.

Do you remember GR's posting in ATCA's forum about the strength of the Greek/GC forces in Cyprus and the strength of the combination of TCs and the Turkish Army? If you do then you'll know why it is necessary to keep the 40,00 strong Turkish Army in the TRNC.

Eric, I'm sorry, but this is one part of the issue that you and I are going to have to disagree about. Perceptions are very important in today's world, and the large ration of Turkish forces to civilians in TRNC makes it look like an occupation - rather than a protection - force. True, there is no guarantee that TRNC would be recognized if troop levels were pared way back - just look at Somaliland with their no foreign troops and maintaining an independent and relatively stable political entity as a good example of a non-recognized, but viable state. I'm just saying that paring back numbers is not going to compromise the TRNC as you think it might.

In regards to cetrtain folk in the thread mocking the TRNC's claim to independence, the GC's don't seem to realize that TRNC can be properly indepedent if it can trade with the rest of the world with its produce, and attract more tourism. The isolations force total dependence upon Turkey, and thus compromises the integrity of the TRNC as an independent nation.

[Marz]

Well then you should realise that those embargos are working is becasue no other country approves of the situation at present thats why they dont trade with the turks of the north, its not like we have some strange power over those nations, they just agree with us thats "turkeys" stance is wrong, except "turkey".
those people got free land and divided the island like they wanted but havent done anything in 35 years, they demand and want us to help on top of what they done too.
They cant help themselfs, they are just so pathetic, they want GC help but they dont have anything to give back.