Cyprus-Forum.com

[YFred]

"However, in terms of their duties on land I do not think that they would need heavy miltary hardware (tanks,artllery,APC's etc) in order to maintain law and order."

Its not a question of maintaining law and order but a question of protecting the sovereignty of Cyprus. We would not need heavy military hardware but a small, mobile and effective military working under the NATO umbrella.

I take your point. But I pose this then - If the Cyprus problem is solved who do we need to protect our sovereignity against beyond what a police force cannot do?

Personally, I do not see any benefit to Cyprus joining NATO but would rather advocate integration into a future EU force (if we were to retain some form of military force).

Cyprus within EU does not need any military. Just a police force will suffice.

You obviously feel secure within the EU. Why then do you require guarantees?

Gregory, you have a house, why do you insure it? What is the chance it will burn down? I have been paying this insurance for 30 years, should I cancel it?

You will find that 99% of TCs will not vote for peace without a guarantee.

So you feel fine leaving the fate of the entire island to the EU mechanism of security but feel that your small community warrants the direct involvement of a foreign power in the sovereign state of Cyprus.

Your insurance theory is simply a joke since your insurance company happens to be presently squatting in the property.

If I have to be objective I must say that Gregory has proven the point here.

You have every opportunity to choose the insurance company you wish, but you cannot force it onto anybody else. You have made your choice and the TCs will make their choice. Few years down the line, the TCs may also feel confident to go for the same choice as yours, in the mean time you must respect the choice that the TCs make. Just the same as the TCs are not telling you which organisation to choose, you cannot tell them which one they can choose, never mind which one they cannot choose.

[YFred]

"However, in terms of their duties on land I do not think that they would need heavy miltary hardware (tanks,artllery,APC's etc) in order to maintain law and order."

Its not a question of maintaining law and order but a question of protecting the sovereignty of Cyprus. We would not need heavy military hardware but a small, mobile and effective military working under the NATO umbrella.

I take your point. But I pose this then - If the Cyprus problem is solved who do we need to protect our sovereignity against beyond what a police force cannot do?

Personally, I do not see any benefit to Cyprus joining NATO but would rather advocate integration into a future EU force (if we were to retain some form of military force).

Cyprus within EU does not need any military. Just a police force will suffice.

You obviously feel secure within the EU. Why then do you require guarantees?

Gregory, you have a house, why do you insure it? What is the chance it will burn down? I have been paying this insurance for 30 years, should I cancel it?

You will find that 99% of TCs will not vote for peace without a guarantee.

So you feel fine leaving the fate of the entire island to the EU mechanism of security but feel that your small community warrants the direct involvement of a foreign power in the sovereign state of Cyprus.

Your insurance theory is simply a joke since your insurance company happens to be presently squatting in the property.

No, if the RoC and signed a peace agreement anytime in the last 35 years Turkey would have left. It is the absence of the peace agreement that warrants Turkish presence in Cyprus not the fact that they are squatting. Once the peace deal is signed, Turkey will go.

[Gregory]

"However, in terms of their duties on land I do not think that they would need heavy miltary hardware (tanks,artllery,APC's etc) in order to maintain law and order."

Its not a question of maintaining law and order but a question of protecting the sovereignty of Cyprus. We would not need heavy military hardware but a small, mobile and effective military working under the NATO umbrella.

I take your point. But I pose this then - If the Cyprus problem is solved who do we need to protect our sovereignity against beyond what a police force cannot do?

Personally, I do not see any benefit to Cyprus joining NATO but would rather advocate integration into a future EU force (if we were to retain some form of military force).

Cyprus within EU does not need any military. Just a police force will suffice.

You obviously feel secure within the EU. Why then do you require guarantees?

Gregory, you have a house, why do you insure it? What is the chance it will burn down? I have been paying this insurance for 30 years, should I cancel it?

You will find that 99% of TCs will not vote for peace without a guarantee.

So you feel fine leaving the fate of the entire island to the EU mechanism of security but feel that your small community warrants the direct involvement of a foreign power in the sovereign state of Cyprus.

Your insurance theory is simply a joke since your insurance company happens to be presently squatting in the property.

No, if the RoC and signed a peace agreement anytime in the last 35 years Turkey would have left. It is the absence of the peace agreement that warrants Turkish presence in Cyprus not the fact that they are squatting. Once the peace deal is signed, Turkey will go.

Apparently not true since Talat has repeated that no properties will be handed back to the GC's. So what do you mean by Turkey going? Even with the Annan Plan the majority of GC's were without their property but offered complex compensation instead.

If you mean militarily then under the Annan Plan a contingent was still present on the island and the guarantees mean it could step back under the faintest of civil unrests.

Once again, how do you define Turkey will go?

P.S as for the 30 odd years before the Annan Plan may I remind you who the world recognised as Mr No. (starts with D)

[Piratis]

Bananiot, you didn't answer my question:

Also I want to ask you another question. You have a certain idea of what the best feasible option is. Do you think that the kind of "solutions" you accept are also just and fair?

Why are you afraid to answer?

[Oracle]

The one man one vote call is a sure prescription for disaster since it does not take into account the realities in Cyprus.

What are these "realities" which make the system of democracy, desired by ~6 billion people, uniquely disastrous for Cypriots?

Bananiot ... you also did not answer my question (above) also!

[Actually, I had a bet you couldn't answer it and would ignore it or come back with a personal attack ... So, I'll take your silence to mean you haven't got a clue what you are talking about but will say anything just to please your TC friends ... because that is how it looks from here.]

[YFred]

The one man one vote call is a sure prescription for disaster since it does not take into account the realities in Cyprus.

What are these "realities" which make the system of democracy, desired by ~6 billion people, uniquely disastrous for Cypriots?

Bananiot ... you also did not answer my question (above) also!

[Actually, I had a bet you couldn't answer it and would ignore it or come back with a personal attack ... So, I'll take your silence to mean you haven't got a clue what you are talking about but will say anything just to please your TC friends ... because that is how it looks from here.]

Hissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

[Piratis]

The proposed idea is a form of proportional representation which is quite common in many EU countries and it ensures that political parties have fair representation in parliament and the executive. the major difference is that proportianal representation in Cyprus will work at the community level when voting for P and VP and not at political party level. The fact also that the presidency is rotating means that each community will have a fair representation at running the country.

Do you know what the word proportional means? From the way you talk is seems that you don't.

Also can you tell me in what countries such scheme exists for political parties? I know some countries which do not have the proportional system that we have (the most fair in my opinion), but instead a system which gives a boosted representation to the biggest party, and totally excludes the smaller ones. Such disproportional systems (in the case of political parties) always favors the majority (or plurality in the case no majority is formed) and never (from what I know) the minorities.

As I said many times I believe that the most democratic system is the proportional one (apli analogiki) where each party gets as many seats as the percentage of total votes it received, without any schemes created to alter the choices of the people, especially when these schemes are created to discriminate people based on their race. With the political parties, any party (at least in theory) has the possibility of winning the elections and receiving the representation boost. When the discrimination is done on the basis of ethnicity this means that Greek Cypriots will be convicted to be always under-represented and second category citizens.

I don't exclude rotating presidency, but this should be done in a proportional way, and proportional in the case of GCs-TCs means 4:1 or even 5:1. Also, the system should not only be cross voting, but all the people as one should vote for the president and the vote of each citizen should count the same without racist discrimination.

[Piratis]

The one man one vote call is a sure prescription for disaster since it does not take into account the realities in Cyprus.

What are these "realities" which make the system of democracy, desired by ~6 billion people, uniquely disastrous for Cypriots?

Bananiot ... you also did not answer my question (above) also!

[Actually, I had a bet you couldn't answer it and would ignore it or come back with a personal attack ... So, I'll take your silence to mean you haven't got a clue what you are talking about but will say anything just to please your TC friends ... because that is how it looks from here.]

Bananiot is not an honest person. He is a fake. He chooses to say what will make him likable among our enemies and avoids saying anything that might displease them.

[Bananiot]

Piratis, you make me laugh. At least have the decency to make youself public and then decide who is real and who is fake. Perhaps this Saturday morning I can take you over to our enemy's side and introduce you to some real TC's who have bore the brunt of TMT's menice but stood their ground and are still battling away, when your protege was secretly meeting with the Denktash's plotting the perpetuation of the Turkish army in Cyprus.

Your simplistic questions should be addressed to those that have accepted that the solution we are seeking is bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality as defined by the relevent resolutions of the UN. Perhaps you do not like this but here you are in the minority, I am afraid, and again, by your own logic, the truth is just a matter of statistics, so the majority is correct. I cannot really help you.

I do not know what the crazy woman is doing here but perhaps she can answer her own question by pondering on the reasons we accepted federation when up to 1974 anyone who dared mentioned the dreaded word was sent to hell.

[-mikkie2-]

"Do you know what the word proportional means? From the way you talk is seems that you don't."

Perhaps this may help you Piratis. There are several forms of proprtional representation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportion ... esentation

And I stated " a form of proportional representation " as that is exactly what it is so please don't insult my intelligence.

The form being propsed is based on a cross-voting principle weighted according to the size of each community. Now I think your problem is that the weighting is 66:33 instead of 80:20 or 75:25

I don't think this is a racist principle. I think its only fair that TC's will have a major say in the who the TC VP is just as it is fair that the GC's have the major say in who the GC President is.

I think you need to think about what is best for Cyprus as a whole, rather than what is best for one community over the other. Our history is a mess and you can't jump from a mess to ideal in one step.