Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

This Zan is a fucking thief. He says that because what they own is not good enough for them they should steal from us!!!! What a fucking barbarian thief he is!!

[Kikapu]

"stop this nonsensical idea that that because the TC people are 18% that is all they deserve"

which automatically raises the question of what ALL the other communities that make up the 82 per cent deserve and why should they be limited to 82 per cent.

Istanbul is a city and hosts 14 million people with plenty of industry and economic activity to support them and much of the economy. Two hundred thousand people can easily fit in the 18 per cent of Cyprus and have room to spare. That many lived there before 1974 and were getting on just fine.

Kifeas puts forth a simple and intelligent proposal, that the area is first proportional to population, and secondly it limits the number of GCs that will have a legitimate reason to live there without resorting to artifical limitations. It is a way to avoid most if not all of the properties issue.

Does it tackle all the farming issues?? How about Tourism??

This is not just about living space but of commercial space. We are not a race of Billionaires to have a playground for the rich like Monaco for example. We do not want to be just a reserve where the tourist come to buy our locally produced arts and crafts...We need to be commercially viable not just rent an apartment from you in our own country.

This is all the reason to have a open and free True Federation where the size of the north can pretty much remain as it is now, but you cannot exclude the GC's from living and exercising their democratic, political and Human Rights from having the same rights as the TC's there. The same in the south of course. Anything else, then you will run up against the EU's "Wall of Laws" as well an OXI from the GC's. But the 18% with fewer GC's might get the OK from the GC's and there will be too few GC's to even make a dent politically in the north, so that the EU's laws are not violated. Of course, this too will be based on a True Federation and a strong central government, and no Confederation what so ever. If Confederation is going to be "order of the day", then once again, partition on 82%-18% will be more desirable than further problems of conflict down the road, because you know it will be coming, so waste time and blood.

The EU seem to be doing fine with the Veto and the non voting rights of settlers so why not in Cyprus.


What do you mean by desirable??? 18% is desirable only to GCs and not to common sense and commercial viability.

Conflict will come only from those that are only after the oppression of TCs. Nothing to do with what is achievable with common sense. You seem to be happy with oppression rather than common sense.

Well Zan, what did you think it was going to happen after a Unitary state ended, that the "virgin birth" was going to establish two new states with the lines drawn from 1974 and all the "goodies" provided for the TC's in the Annan Plan.? Actually, that was a rhetorical question. There wouldn't even be any discussions taking place for a settlement now, if it wasn't for the fact that Cyprus is in the EU and that's where Turkey wants to go. There even be any crossings open. The idea that the Cyprus problem was solved in 1974, is no longer the case. I know we had 30+ years of "make believes" that the north was ours to keep from then on, but the rules have changed since 2004 I'm afraid. It is time for a more realistic "make believes" to take place, because the old one has not gotten us anywhere. We are not going to be allowed to prosper on others land at the expense of others. I can't make it any simpler than that.

That cuts both way and is not accurate...which would mean a return to the question of how many TCs would have left the island if things would have been different. We need a more realistic approach than just he numbers of today....Simple!!!

I'm using the numbers from 1960, at the time the creation of the Republic of Cyprus and not today's numbers. It was 4:1 Ratio back then and not just recently.

[Viewpoint]

Do we have 50% of the say in the type of solution that will be found?

[Nikitas]

Yes VP you will get 50 per cent of the say on solution and on all matters affecting the federation, which is what political equality is all about.

We are talking territory here, and that has nor bearing on the issue of political equality. Even at the 18 per cent level the north will have half the coastline of CYprus and a population density lower than the south. It would in fact have a coastline longer than that of Belgium and Holland combined. And it just so happens that it is in terms of quality the best coastline of Cyprus. If 200 000 people claim they cannot make a good, a very good living out of that coastline, then they must send their leaders to business school.

[zan]

Yes VP you will get 50 per cent of the say on solution and on all matters affecting the federation, which is what political equality is all about.

We are talking territory here, and that has nor bearing on the issue of political equality. Even at the 18 per cent level the north will have half the coastline of CYprus and a population density lower than the south. It would in fact have a coastline longer than that of Belgium and Holland combined. And it just so happens that it is in terms of quality the best coastline of Cyprus. If 200 000 people claim they cannot make a good, a very good living out of that coastline, then they must send their leaders to business school.

So why is it that you cannot make do with less then Nikitas??? It seems you only want it to stop us having it...This is not about how many we are but how we can use the land and ensure our survival. I don't agree that the best coastlines are in the areas we will end up with either.

[Nikitas]

Best beaches in Cyprus are Davlos, Salamis, Karpasia sand dunes, Kyrenia coves. You obviously have not traveled around the island much. In the south there are no beaches to compare to these.

The survival of 200 000 people at a density lower than in the south is a foregone conclusion assuming things are managed reasonably well. In theory their quality of life should be better. But we are also talking fairness here and a situation where no one will feel cheated. A disproportionate allocation of territory does not provide a feeling of fairness for the future.

Conversely one could ask why the south should be crowded at a higher population density than the the north and be saddled with all the heavy industry of the island. Industry which benefits both sides, like cement plants, power generation, container ports etc. What is the south, the garbage can of this BBF thing?

[Viewpoint]

With a BBF people will be able to travel and settle all over the island, the only drawback is that some people do not want to live under GC or TC administration, a choice is what is important here why should any one be forced to do one or the other why not allow people to choose for themselves.

[bill cobbett]

With a BBF people will be able to travel and settle all over the island, the only drawback is that some people do not want to live under GC or TC administration, a choice is what is important here why should any one be forced to do one or the other why not allow people to choose for themselves.

Almost absolutely VP. It should be clear that any BBF based settlement must be compliant with EU primary laws on the matters of freedom of movement and property rights so that people have a right to choose where they live and how they enjoy their property.

How people choose to exercise these two rights becomes, as it should be, matters for each individual citizen. Naturally many people will say and feel they face a "Hobson's Choice" (ie, they will feel they have no choice) but the law is not designed to suit individual prejudices for those who, for instance, say I won't live in the "Turkish State" because it's full of tcs or I don't want to live in the other state because it's full of grs and I don't trust them and so on.

So irrespective of individual and community prejudices the state will have complied with EU primary laws in this style of BBF by offering the choice, one that respects total choice in freedom of movement and property rights.

[Piratis]

With a BBF people will be able to travel and settle all over the island, the only drawback is that some people do not want to live under GC or TC administration, a choice is what is important here why should any one be forced to do one or the other why not allow people to choose for themselves.

VP, without force the whole island would be made up by a majority of GCs.

You are the ones who want to use force in order to annihilate GCs from their homelands and artificially create some "Turkish Cyprus" on our lands.

[Viewpoint]

With a BBF people will be able to travel and settle all over the island, the only drawback is that some people do not want to live under GC or TC administration, a choice is what is important here why should any one be forced to do one or the other why not allow people to choose for themselves.

VP, without force the whole island would be made up by a majority of GCs.

You are the ones who want to use force in order to annihilate GCs from their homelands and artificially create some "Turkish Cyprus" on our lands.

Totally wrong, what we want is for everyone to live where they wish but having 2 states will mean many GCs will not want to live under TC administration which I can understand as many TCs do not want to live under a GC administration.