denizaksulu wrote:Paphitis wrote:DT. wrote:Byron wrote:Byron wrote:Christofias is a joke , he is planning to sell us to the Turks, nobody in Cyprus has confidence in him.
Christofias may be too far left for a few of us but that doesn't mean he's out to sell anyone. guarantees, virgin births and compensation rather than return are red lines that will not be crossed and have the legal backing to withstand international criticism. Govt power sharing will be our biggest compromise if significant territory adjustments are made.
The President has a knack of repeating his arguments to every EU leader and to any American and Russian that visits the Presidential Palace thereby laying the foundations for a possible blame game to hit the Turkish side. The PR campaign that is being planned on the possible collapse of the talks if the outcome is forecasted to be rejected by a referendum will be unprecedented.
Turkey will be the loser from this round of talks, and every time Eroglu or Esheksiksi (whatever his name is) open their mouth about 2 states and Turkish military presence the losses for Turkey mount up that little bit more.
The people of Cyprus have elected the most progressive, solution seeking President they will ever elect. If Turkey kicks this opportunity away it will regret it. These concessions by the President are done in the knowledge that they won't be reciprocated.
Agree with you 100%.
If anything, it will confirm to all GCs that it is with Turkey and Turks we are dealing with, meaning that they will never budge one iota. They want a complete unconditional surrender from us, and I don't think Christofias will sell us out.
It is just that the anti communist forces within Cyprus are so bigoted against AKEL, they find it unbearable that Cyprus has an AKEL President. It is this type of mentality that plagues Cypriots in general when dealing with the Cyprob.
Personally, I dont think Christofias is a sell-out. He will negotiate and present his case to the populus who after a referandum - which will say OHI Mk III - will retire saying he tried but the people voted NO. The same goes for the Northern administration. What else did anyone expect.
Referendums are the most stupid things in Democracies.
Can someone explain to me on what legal or other knowledge a citizen can vote yes or no on a solution plan which is under prepare for 35 years , full of legal terms and conclusions?
Simple example
A country make a referendum to go to war or not- How the citizens can vote unless they have (all of them ) a full report from the Defence ministry of the available military power/secret guns/secret plans etc.?
This is the reason we ellect certain people to do the job.