detailer wrote:Kifeas wrote:detailer wrote:If this does not change forever, the legality will stay as "legality".
Therefore you do not accept that these properties belong to the GCs?
My point is clear enough.
detailer wrote:Kifeas wrote:Viewpoint wrote:COMPENSATION FOR USED LAND
Who will force us to accept this "reality"?
Noone will force, you will accept it if you want an agreement.
Kifeas wrote:detailer wrote:Kifeas wrote:Viewpoint wrote:COMPENSATION FOR USED LAND
Who will force us to accept this "reality"?
Noone will force, you will accept it if you want an agreement.
You actually want to say an "agreement" according to your measures and standards!
Viewpoint wrote:Any solution will contain a compensation element for land used by the north, you hardly expect to get land back where someone has spent millions building a holiday complex, or a man has built his home and lived there for 30 years or has developed and sold homes, you cant just demolish all these developments just to return it to the pre 1974 owner. Reality is a harsh thing and hard cash will help heal those wounds, if fair prices are paid (and this is what we should ensure happens for all refugees who are unable to get their land back) then people can buy land elsewhere and move on. And please dont spin me that ancestral lands bullshit, ample compensation will ensure the majority of refugees are made happy.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests