Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Isnt that why you so desperately want those tanks out of the way??? change in power as you say...

[erolz]

That is a matter of dispute.

Sure, you can dispute whatever you want as long as you have the tanks behind you to support your illegal actions.

And you can claim that the TRNC's status is simply a matter of legality and law and not of politicis if you wish but the fact that simply screaming at us 'you are illegal (under our laws), you are illegal' is not going to achieve anything except perhaps giving you a false sense of contentment. In fact such an approach can only help solidify partition not get rid of it, and yet to you I am the one with an agenda of partition and you claim to be an advocate of ending partition. How strane is that?

[Piratis]

Oh I see. So we should accept that "TRNC" is legal and this will lead to unification. Very interesting argument.

[Kifeas]

You can believe whatever you want, but "TRNC" is illegal and this is a fact.

What body wrote the laws that the TRNC is deemed to 'illegal under? What body enforces those laws? The TRNC is deemed illegal not by laws but by political states or unions of political states that have no mandate or jusrisdiction to 'rule the world'.

It is a fact that various UN resolution have labeld the TRNC an illegal state. That is a fact. It is also a fact that the UN has never been given a role to create worldwide legislation or enforcment of such legisaltion. The deeming of the TRNC as 'illegal' is a poltical decision not a legal one. If it is a legal one then you need to show me the statue (law) under which it is deemed to be illegal, verify the jurisdiction of this law and show me where and when the trial took place to establish that the TRNC is in breach of this law. You can not. All you can show is the UN resolution which is not law. Just a political decsion of an assosication of states.

Then Erol, can you possibly tell me why the TC community and Turkey are into on going negotiations with the GC side for 31 years now? If everything is as simplistic as you described it, why are you negotiating with us in the first place? Who obliges you and Turkey to negotiate for a solution that after all will make you loose part of the "TRNC" territory and return an unknown yet amount of GC properties? If there is no international law, why you do not just say, what ever Turkey occupied is ours and we do not care if we are recognised or not? Do you make the GCs a favour for negotiating?

[erolz]

Then Erol, can you possibly tell me why the TC community and Turkey are into on going negotiations with the GC side for 31 years now? If everything is as simplistic as you described it, why are you negotiating with us in the first place? Who obliges you and Turkey to negotiate for a solution that after all will make you loose part of the "TRNC" territory and return an unknown yet amount of GC properties? If there is no international law, why you do not just say, what ever Turkey occupied is ours and we do not care if we are recognised or not? Do you make the GCs a favour for negotiating?

Well I could just take the reverse side of this argument. If the situation in Cyprus was just simply a matter of 'law' (and not politics) - the same as if I had stolen your car for example - then why has this law not been enforced and the TRNC put in jail for it's illegal acts. The fact is that despite the claims that it is simply a matter of 'legality' the situation is in fact a matter of politics and not law. Politics involved negotiation (law does not). Politics involves finding allies and applying pressure (law does not). Politicis is the art of the possible (law is not). That is whay I say that simply screaming 'you are illegal, you are illegal' does nothing to help solve a political issue. In fact it just makes it harder if that is all you do. As far as their is any internation law (and there is not) we _could_ just say we do not care what others think, the TRNC is ours - and in many ways we have done this. As a political problem however the situation is very different.

[erolz]

Oh I see. So we should accept that "TRNC" is legal and this will lead to unification. Very interesting argument.

I am not saying that you should accpet that the TRNC is legal. What I am saying is you stop your meaningless assertions that the Cyprus problem is merely a matter of 'legailty' (and that anyone who does not do what you want is against the very concept of law) and accept the reality that this is a poltical issue that needs a political appraoch and a poltical solution.

Actually I do think that recognising the TRNC (for the return of some land) would lead eventualy to unification, sooner or later. Unlike most people here I do not think the only thing that motivates peiople is self interests. I think if we had two independent and equal states that eventually we would choose to unite (in one form or another - evolving over time) rather than have a false unity imposed on us. We would choose to unite not because we wanted something else (trade, property back etc etc) but because we know that unity is better than division. But this is another argument entirely.

[MicAtCyp]

Why are you glad you will not see him again?

Look at his signature.

Or would you be glad to see all the TC leave this forum? Or Cyprus perhaps?

Don't jump into conclusions Erol.You asked a question you should have waited for my answer before proceeding.

The TRNC is deemed illegal not by laws but by political states

.

The very constitution of the pseudo is based on theft. Is theft according to you legal, or are we going to change the meaning of sanity here to make theft legal?

[Piratis]

What I am saying is you stop your meaningless assertions that the Cyprus problem is merely a matter of 'legailty'

They are not meaningless. The law is our only "weapon" against the might of the 100 times bigger and 1000 times more powerful Turkey. So sorry, we will not drop our only weapon so you will have it your way without any problem.

I think if we had two independent and equal states that eventually we would choose to unite (in one form or another - evolving over time) rather than have a false unity imposed on us. We would choose to unite not because we wanted something else (trade, property back etc etc) but because we know that unity is better than division. But this is another argument entirely.

How about this: You give me half of your property, and then we can decide if we want to make a partnership. Do you agree?

Or another way: TCs keep 9% of land (if they have no problem keeping double their percentage I guess they shouldn't have a problem keeping half), and then we decide if we want to make partnership. Do you agree?

[metecyp]

They are not meaningless. The law is our only "weapon" against the might of the 100 times bigger and 1000 times more powerful Turkey. So sorry, we will not drop our only weapon so you will have it your way without any problem.

You're right that law might be your only weapon to have it only your way but there're even more powerful weapons called communication and mutual understanding where both sides can get very close to having their ways at the same time...but you insist on having it only your way just like some TCs you blame to use "Turkey's tanks" to get only their way.

[erolz]

Why are you glad you will not see him again?

Look at his signature.

What the one that says

"We wish to live in peace as neighbours" ???

The very constitution of the pseudo is based on theft. Is theft according to you legal, or are we going to change the meaning of sanity here to make theft legal?

The USA is based on 'stolen land'. Auatralia is based on stolen land. In fact every country is based on 'stolen land' one way or another as far as I am concerned. Where is the law in these cases? There were people living in Cyprus before 'Greeks' ever existed and they are not here now. They did not sell Cyprus to Greeks. Greeks stole the land from them as they stole land that made up the Hellenic empire. It's all a matter of time.

For something to be illegal there have to be laws, a law making body, some form of legitimacy and acceptance of this body and an enforcment body (if the laws are to have any meaning). If I steal your car then there is a law, a law making body an enforcment body and a due process of determining my guilt and innocnence. If one country takes land from another there is none of these things. If you can not see the difference between these two senarios and why one is a legal problem and one is a political problem I can not help you. We can talk about the morality of theft - in either circumstance if you like but that is not the same as talking about the leaglity of each senario.