Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

As it stands right now at the end of the day when everybody goes to polls to vote “Yes” or “No”, they will think what am I gaining from this financially

Everybody will think "what am I gaining. Am I better of or worst of?". However there are other things that make people better or worst off beyond financial reasons. Security is one of the most basic needs that has to be fulfill, and today, in the 21st century, people value democracy and human rights and they expect steps forward and not backward in these.

In any case the financial benefits are part of the equation. But why should a solution make GCs worst off? Aren't the GCs who are going to get large amounts of land and coastline back? Why then the GCs are loosing financially?

Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will suck money from the GCs and live on the expense of GCs?
Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will use the unproportionately large power they will get to gain even more unproportionately larger financial benefits again on the expense of GCs?

The GCs will gain a lot from a true solution. Of course they have nothing to gain, in financial or other terms, from an unfair partition plan that the connection between the two states (beyond the connection that independent states have within the EU) will be mostly the transfer of wealth from the GCs to the TCs.

Remember, solution of the Cyprus problem means solving our problem too (and hence making us better off as well), not solving the problems of TCs and Turkey and create more problems for GCs. Thats not a solution, thats closing of the Cyprus problem with winners (Turks - TCs) and losers (GCs), and of course you can be sure that GCs will never accept such thing.

[metecyp]

Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will suck money from the GCs and live on the expense of GCs?
Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will use the unproportionately large power they will get to gain even more unproportionately larger financial benefits again on the expense of GCs?

When I hear views like this, I want to scream like: "I DON'T WANT YOUR MONEY, I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR HELP, LET'S AGREE ON PARTITION AND LEAVE US ALONE!!!" But then, I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible...

[insan]

Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will suck money from the GCs and live on the expense of GCs?
Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will use the unproportionately large power they will get to gain even more unproportionately larger financial benefits again on the expense of GCs?

When I hear views like this, I want to scream like: "I DON'T WANT YOUR MONEY, I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR HELP, LET'S AGREE ON PARTITION AND LEAVE US ALONE!!!" But then, I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible...

metecyp, unfortunately, a recent poll in South showed that %70 of GC community support the policies of Tassos about the solution of Cyprus problem.

[Agios Amvrosios]

Metecyp:

I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND

Ok when can we move back in. I have a rostered day off on Thursday.

[metecyp]

metecyp, unfortunately, a recent poll in South showed that %70 of GC community support the policies of Tassos about the solution of Cyprus problem.

Yes, I heard about this and I don't know what to make of it...I guess what T-Pap is trying to do will be clear soon, then we'll see if he's still supported by his community.

Ok when can we move back in. I have a rostered day off on Thursday.

First we have to agree on partition which will involve exchange of TC properties in the south with the properties in the north...then the TC side will give back some land to the GC side and then if your house/land falls in the GC side, you can move in anytime you want.

[Piratis]

Matecyp,

Turkcyp claimed that GCs rejected the A plan for financial reasons. The question is: Since GCs were the ones to get land and coastline back, how comes and they would be the ones that would loose? What I said simply explained why, and it is a fact either you like it or not.

I am sorry if what I said upsets you, but the reality is that your leadership doesn't show in action that doesn't want our land and money, quite the opposite.
And as I get from your comments, it is either "unification" with you sucking our money, or partition. How about considering a true unification where the TCs don't gain financially (or in any other way) on the expense of GCs??
Why is the only "solution" you can consider the one that TCs and Turkey gain, and GCs lose?

[Kifeas]

Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will suck money from the GCs and live on the expense of GCs?
Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will use the unproportionately large power they will get to gain even more unproportionately larger financial benefits again on the expense of GCs?

When I hear views like this, I want to scream like: "I DON'T WANT YOUR MONEY, I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR HELP, LET'S AGREE ON PARTITION AND LEAVE US ALONE!!!" But then, I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible...

metecyp, unfortunately, a recent poll in South showed that %70 of GC community support the policies of Tassos about the solution of Cyprus problem.

Everyone please tell me, what is the relationship between the above dialogue of Piratis and Metecyp, and the comment that Insan made below, upon (on the basis) of this dialogue?

Insan, I think is about time, an intelligent person like you seem to be, get more serious with your postings in this forum.

[erolz]

Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will suck money from the GCs and live on the expense of GCs?
Is it maybe because you accept that the TCs will use the unproportionately large power they will get to gain even more unproportionately larger financial benefits again on the expense of GCs?

When I hear views like this, I want to scream like: "I DON'T WANT YOUR MONEY, I DON'T WANT YOUR LAND, I DON'T WANT YOUR HELP, LET'S AGREE ON PARTITION AND LEAVE US ALONE!!!" But then, I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible...

metecyp, unfortunately, a recent poll in South showed that %70 of GC community support the policies of Tassos about the solution of Cyprus problem.

Everyone please tell me, what is the relationship between the above dialogue of Piratis and Metecyp, and the comment that Insan made below, upon (on the basis) of this dialogue?

Insan, I think is about time, an intelligent person like you seem to be, get more serious with your postings in this forum.

The connection, as I see it, is to metecyp statement "I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible.."

To which I see Insan's reply as being related.

I am sure a person as intelligent as yourself Kiefas can see the connection here? Of course I do not expect you to agree with Insan's view - but surely you can see how Insan's statment is connected to metecyp's ?

[Kifeas]

The connection, as I see it, is to metecyp statement "I remind myself that you're just one person and the majority of GCs don't think like you do and an agreeable solution that both communities benefit from is possible.."

To which I see Insan's reply as being related.

I am sure a person as intelligent as yourself Kiefas can see the connection here? Of course I do not expect you to agree with Insan's view - but surely you can see how Insan's statment is connected to metecyp's ?

So we must assume that because 70% of GCs support the policies of Tassos Papadopoullos about the solution of Cyprus problem, as Insan says, and then we conncet it to metecyp's complain about the negative or intolerant way that some GCs think, and because Insan's comment came after Metecyp's comment, then what Insan implies is that 70% of GCs are what Metecyp described and criticised simultaneously.

Is this a correct conclusion, if we accept that Insan's posting is a genuinely related one to that of Metecyp?
In other words, according to Insan, 70% of GCs are what Metecyp dislikes.

[erolz]

So we must assume that because 70% of GCs support the policies of Tassos Papadopoullos about the solution of Cyprus problem, as Insan says, and then we conncet it to metecyp's complain about the negative or intolerant way that some GCs think, and because Insan's comment came after Metecyp's comment, then what Insan implies is that 70% of GCs are what Metecyp described and criticised simultaneously.

Is this a correct conclusion, if we accept that Insan's posting is a genuinely related one to that of Metecyp?
In other words, according to Insan, 70% of GCs are what Metecyp dislikes.

You can and no doubt will assume whatever you like. However we were not talking about what you, or I or anyone else should assume or not. You asked (everyone), as I saw it, what relevance or connection Insan's comments had with those of Metecyp / Piratis. I tried to answer your question - that is all. Metecyp said that the majority of GC wanted a solution that benefited all. Insan pointed out that a majority support TP appraoch and clearly Insan's view is that this is not compatible with the former statement - at least that's how I understood it. Seems pretty simple to me - as far as the connection / relevance of Insans comment goes in relation to the previous comments by metecyp. Like I said you do not have to agree with Insans view that a majority supporting TP is not compatible with a majority wanting a solution that benfits all, and I would not expect you too - but I understood that you could nto see the connection between the two comments and that was what you were asking and what I have tried to answer. Anyway I am sure Insan can speak for himslef in this matter when he has the chance. I only replied really because you asked 'everyone' to pint out what connection there was. I hope that's a bit clearer now?