Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

I seriously wonder how many of you have done their army service in Cyprus and are up here spouting rubbish.

There is a very simple way to determine the setup of the GC and Turkish occupation forces on the island.

The one is defensive and the OTHER one is offensive.
The Turkish troops are stationed with their artillery in front of their infantry on the green line which denotes an offensive setup. (It also means they do not take any GC ground forces seriously as they don't beleive their artillery is in danger of any offensives.)

DT, are you suggesting that the GC artillery is capable of 'going on the offensive'? Then you have contradicted yourself by saying, 'The one is defensive and the one is offensive'.

Sorry forgot to add the word "other"

better?

Nope!.. You better spell it out and tell me which side was 'defensive'. As far as I make ou from your post, both sides were 'offensive'.

The Turks are poisitioned with their artillery first and its infantry behind. The CNG does the opposite.

The Turkish occupation forces are positioned offensively and the CNG defensively.

That is what you said initially. Then you said,' (It also means they do not take any GC ground forces seriously as they don't beleive their artillery is in danger of any offensives.)[/quote].

Which implies that the T/TCs are wrong to believe that, and that the G/GC forces are a 'force to be reckoned with'. Do see my confusion regarding your statement? Please dont go along Oracles line that I am a senile old man

[DT.]

Ok, you're not a senile old man.

You are getting a little weird though.

No army leaves its artillery undefended unless it is about to stage an offensive. The artillery fires forward and the infantry moves in afterwards.

The fact that the artillery is in front of the infantry means that they know perfectly well that the CNG is not positioned in a manner to threaten it.

[CBBB]

I seriously wonder how many of you have done their army service in Cyprus and are up here spouting rubbish.

There is a very simple way to determine the setup of the GC and Turkish occupation forces on the island.

The one is defensive and the OTHER one is offensive.
The Turkish troops are stationed with their artillery in front of their infantry on the green line which denotes an offensive setup. (It also means they do not take any GC ground forces seriously as they don't beleive their artillery is in danger of any offensives.)

DT, are you suggesting that the GC artillery is capable of 'going on the offensive'? Then you have contradicted yourself by saying, 'The one is defensive and the one is offensive'.

Sorry forgot to add the word "other"

better?

Nope!.. You better spell it out and tell me which side was 'defensive'. As far as I make ou from your post, both sides were 'offensive'.

The Turks are poisitioned with their artillery first and its infantry behind. The CNG does the opposite.

The Turkish occupation forces are positioned offensively and the CNG defensively.

That is what you said initially. Then you said,' (It also means they do not take any GC ground forces seriously as they don't beleive their artillery is in danger of any offensives.)

.

Which implies that the T/TCs are wrong to believe that, and that the G/GC forces are a 'force to be reckoned with'. Do see my confusion regarding your statement? Please dont go along Oracles line that I am a senile old man

Don't worry deniz, you are not alone!

[denizaksulu]

Ok, you're not a senile old man.

You are getting a little weird though.

No army leaves its artillery undefended unless it is about to stage an offensive. The artillery fires forward and the infantry moves in afterwards.

The fact that the artillery is in front of the infantry means that they know perfectly well that the CNG is not positioned in a manner to threaten it.

Then you are assuming that the Turkish Army will behave logically. I had been getting the wrong message then, re: the T army.

[Oracle]

Ok, you're not a senile old man.

You are getting a little weird though.

No army leaves its artillery undefended unless it is about to stage an offensive. The artillery fires forward and the infantry moves in afterwards.

The fact that the artillery is in front of the infantry means that they know perfectly well that the CNG is not positioned in a manner to threaten it.

Then you are assuming that the Turkish Army will behave logically. I had been getting the wrong message then, re: the T army.

Gosh you are throwing all caution to the wind today

Impressive bravado ....

[denizaksulu]

Ok, you're not a senile old man.

You are getting a little weird though.

No army leaves its artillery undefended unless it is about to stage an offensive. The artillery fires forward and the infantry moves in afterwards.

The fact that the artillery is in front of the infantry means that they know perfectly well that the CNG is not positioned in a manner to threaten it.

Then you are assuming that the Turkish Army will behave logically. I had been getting the wrong message then, re: the T army.

Gosh you are throwing all caution to the wind today

Impressive bravado ....

Noooooooooooooo. Accordingly the Turkish army DID behave logically.

O, you want me dead. Then join the queue please. Where is that 'Grim Reaper' fella. GR! LET HIM LOOSE!!

[RAFAELLA]

Dear DM, please let me have an answer:

HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION DID WE INVITE GR TROOPS TO "INVADE" IN 1963/64?

Thank you

Have you ever heard of the GC and Greek dream and wish for enosis?

What about the Akritas plan?

If not then I suggest that you do a little reading before you come back again.

Dear DM, I am waiting for a straight answer with proofs and facts.
YOU claim that GR TROOPS INVADED CyR IN 1963/64, HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION?

Why is it sooo difficult to answer a simple and clear question?
Well?

[denizaksulu]

Dear DM, please let me have an answer:

HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION DID WE INVITE GR TROOPS TO "INVADE" IN 1963/64?

Thank you

Have you ever heard of the GC and Greek dream and wish for enosis?

What about the Akritas plan?

If not then I suggest that you do a little reading before you come back again.

Dear DM, I am waiting for a straight answer with proofs and facts.
YOU claim that GR TROOPS INVADED CyR IN 1963/64, HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION

Why is it sooo difficult to answer a simple and clear question?
Well?

Sorry for the interruption here. Did GR have his mercenaries even then?

[denizaksulu]

It could easily be said that the presence (as admitted) of Greek forces on the island from 1963 till 1974 (at least) that they formed part of an initial expeditionary force, culminating in the overthrow of the legal goverment of the Cyprus Republic in 1974. That would be considered an 'Invading Army', by stealth.IMO.

[Get Real!]

Dear DM, please let me have an answer:

HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION DID WE INVITE GR TROOPS TO "INVADE" IN 1963/64?

Thank you

Have you ever heard of the GC and Greek dream and wish for enosis?

What about the Akritas plan?

If not then I suggest that you do a little reading before you come back again.

Dear DM, I am waiting for a straight answer with proofs and facts.
YOU claim that GR TROOPS INVADED CyR IN 1963/64, HOW, WHY and FOR WHAT OCCASION

Why is it sooo difficult to answer a simple and clear question?
Well?

Sorry for the interruption here. Did GR have his mercenaries even then?

I have mercenaries? Where? How many? Are they any good?