Kifeas wrote:Paphitis, you first started a thread proposing for Greece to send 50,000 troops and liberate Cyprus (
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... 649#547649 ,) praising Greece among other things for having one of the strongest armies in Europe; and then, once several people had indicated to you that this is neither feasible nor desirable, you went ahead and opened this thread calling for the withdrawal of the 1,100 "leeches" (ELDYK) from Cyprus, remembering among other things that Greece has financial and economic difficulties, that is in the verge of bankruptcy and that it has also betrayed Cyprus in the past.
Well, I am sure you wouldn't want to hear what such people like you are in my book; but to give you a small indication, you are something worse than what one would regard as a schizophrenic, that is, one shifting from one extreme delusion to another completely opposite one, by the minute.
For an educated man, you absolutely amaze me Kifeas. I did not propose anything to start of with as both threads were
open ended questions!
The central issue of both threads, is the
Treaty of Alliance and Guarantee. The initial thread was entitled, "Should Greece have bases in Cyprus"? The thread was designed to
encourage debate about the Treaty of Guarantee and whether Cypriots deem that Greece has an
obligation under this Treaty to act in a more assertive fashion, and one befitting a nation that is reasonably strong militarily. It also encouraged discussion on whether Cypriots deem it Greece's responsibility to attempt to correct past mistakes. I do not care as to any one's opinion one way or the other, but found the subject quite interesting, because as you say, most people believe that it is
unrealistic and undesirable, which is absolutely fine in my book, because the assessment was primarily based on sound common sense.
But then I opened this thread, and the very protagonists of the initial thread, who believed that my initial thread was unrealistic and undesirable, then came out to defend Greece's meager ELDYK presence, and some even suggested an increase in troop numbers, which incidentally they rejected in the initial thread.
Those defending the ELDYK presence have also defended the
Treaty of Guarantee. This is also fine as far as I am concerned, as long as their assessment is based on logic. However, as far as I am concerned,
there are only 2 extreme points of view that hold water. On the one hand, Greece should either go all the way and deploy many more troops in Cyprus, and if not, then Greece should withdraw ELDYK altogether, because there is absolutely no point in doing things halfheartedly. This just makes a mockery of both Greece and Cyprus and it also gives Turkey a whiff of weakness in terms of political will on our part, and at the same time, it strengthens their ability to argue that the Treaty of Guarantee is very valid. So my point of view is very simple. If Greece is not prepared to go all out, and even take responsibility for the mess it created, then it should withdraw from Cyprus completely, so that the validity of the Treaty of Guarantee can be more seriously challenged.
Both threads I created to encourage some debate. I knew that some people may take issue with the content, and all, including yourself had an opportunity to put your ideas and thoughts into writing in an
intelligent and logical fashion. Sadly Kifeas, you have let yourself down. You chose not to contribute to the threads in a meaningful way, no matter how illogical or silly you may perceive them to be! The threads were an opportunity for you to express your thoughts in a constructive way, and you allowed this opportunity to pass you by. I never would have cared whether your opinions are totally opposite to mine, because I can clearly see both points of view as holding some water which means I also believe that your view has some considerable validity. For a somewhat intelligent person, you surprise me Kifeas!
So isn't it quite amazing that I actually subscribe to the theory that Greece should actually deploy 40,000 troops in Cyprus, to match Turkey, placing the RoC in a slightly more advantageous position militarily, and perhaps give it a stronger negotiating hand(?) despite this being politically costly(?)
OR withdraw the meager 1,100 ELDYK force from the island which will only marginally disadvantage the RoC militarily but give it a stronger political hand at challenging the validity of the Treaty of Guarantee. So what? Crucify me. Feel free to disagree if you wish!
Who is the idiot now Kifeas? 
Is it really that difficult for you to understand simple logic?
