Cyprus-Forum.com

[turkkan]

viewpoint, there is no point in discussing it. WHat are the greek cypriots supposed to do, just sit back and watch themselves loosing the battle. The obvious answer is to fight back and thats what they are doing. Perfectly natural. We will ofcourse response by developing more land and so on.

[Viewpoint]

I would expect them to come back to the negotiating table to do what they didnt do last time and negotiate for a solution that they can agree to, this can be recognized partition.

[turkkan]

that would mean they would have to admit they were wrong,and im not saying they were wrong for doing so but thats what it would amount to at the end. Pride comes first for most.

[Realist]

So the jist of your whole arguement is that because you have the upper hand right now you will do what you want regardless if it's fair, but expect the GC to give concessions and show good will.

So how excectly do the TC also expect to portray themselves as holding the moral high ground as well?

[Bananiot]

So, let us look at the pragmatic approach. You are saying that the TC community which voted overwhelmingly for a solution is immoral and the GC community which voted overwhelmingly against the solution is moral. We will need to perform miracles to convince the world that this is so. Furthermore, the TC leadership is constantly calling for a rersumption of the negotiations, showing in this way that they mean business, whereas our leadership using the old ploy of the tyranny of words, refuses to even outline the points it wants changed in the A plan. I have news for you. The easy days of Rauf Denktas are over. Ms Kennedy, only yesterday, said in Nicosia, that Talat has an honest vision for the solution of the Cyprob.

[magikthrill]

whereas our leadership using the old ploy of the tyranny of words, refuses to even outline the points it wants changed in the A plan. .

ENOUGH with this!!!

T-Pap has clearly stated out the points with which the A plan did not satisfy his community!

Are you seriously unaware of this or do you just enjoy being an idiot?

[Piratis]

Bananiot, we can also vote "yes" for a solution very easily. Just give us the solution we want.

Of course the TCs voted yes. They (US/UK) gave them 99% of that they wanted!! They gave them partition + our money + EU. Why would they say "no" to that? And why would we say "yes" to that?

[Viewpoint]

Realist look at this way returning to the negotiating table only allows both sides the opportunity to understand what the other side demands in an official setting and whether the property issue which is one of the most important issues to many GCs can be adjusted to accommodate a formula which would make an agreement acceptable to all. But if we continue as we are a war of words will continue, court cases will be pending for many years to come but this will not mean that the development of GCs land will stop, in fact i personally feel it will increase as profit always fuels development. If the GCs want to put a stop to this issue thay have to return to the table and do what they ommitted to do previously with sincerity and a genuine desire to negotiate a solution that would make all Cypriots feel committed to solution.

Nothing to do with moral high ground, we have to get over those issues in our minds and be more realistic and prcatical in solving the problems in hand.

[Bananiot]

Magicthrill, do you know something the rest of us don't? He has clearly defined the points he wants changed, you say. What are these points, when did he do it and why is the SG keep asking for them then? Why did Laura Keneddy asked for them only the other day? What the heck is going on? You need more proof? Two nights ago Papadopoulos said that he will not give the changes because he does not want the SG to have an arbitration role again.

[magikthrill]

Here is the letter sent to the SG on 4 June 2004 about the reasons why the A plan did not satisfy the GCs:

http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/A ... enDocument


Not only does it mention suggestions and needs that T-Pap sent to Annan before 31/03/2004 and were IGNORED by both De Soto and Annan but there are also 52 points as to why the plan was rejected.

What is the point of giving suggestions if they will be completely overlooked in the first place?