The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


US does not back Turkish positions - Clinton

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

US does not back Turkish positions - Clinton

Postby paliometoxo » Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:44 am

WASHINGTON - US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday at the Senate that ''we strongly support the continuing negotiations under UN auspices for a bizonal, bicommunal resolution on Cyprus,'' and noted that the US did not ascribe to Turkish positions.

Clinton was replying to a question by US Senator for New Jersey Robert Menendez concerning statements by US Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey in a newspaper interview that Turkey has ''security concerns on Cyprus''.

She noted that the ''we have been heartened by some of the intense consultations'' between the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot leadership, noting however that ''there is a long way to go.''

''And I think that, I can’t speak for our Ambassador, but I assume that he was stating the opinion of the Turkish government. That is something that we do not ascribe to, because we want to see the entire Cyprus situation resolved, but we certainly understand that is the stated position of the Turkish government, not the American government,'' she added.
User avatar
paliometoxo
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8837
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Nicosia, paliometocho

Re: US does not back Turkish positions - Clinton

Postby YFred » Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:47 am

paliometoxo wrote:WASHINGTON - US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday at the Senate that ''we strongly support the continuing negotiations under UN auspices for a bizonal, bicommunal resolution on Cyprus,'' and noted that the US did not ascribe to Turkish positions.

Clinton was replying to a question by US Senator for New Jersey Robert Menendez concerning statements by US Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey in a newspaper interview that Turkey has ''security concerns on Cyprus''.

She noted that the ''we have been heartened by some of the intense consultations'' between the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot leadership, noting however that ''there is a long way to go.''

''And I think that, I can’t speak for our Ambassador, but I assume that he was stating the opinion of the Turkish government. That is something that we do not ascribe to, because we want to see the entire Cyprus situation resolved, but we certainly understand that is the stated position of the Turkish government, not the American government,'' she added.

Lady speaks with fork tounge. They could make Turkey do anything they want, the question is is it right that they should? Should we allow the Americans to interfere in the peace process?
User avatar
YFred
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12100
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:22 am
Location: Lurucina-Upon-Thames

Postby paliometoxo » Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:50 am

they should if it means turkey wont get a second official state and control over cyprus and that the walls come down and we unite the island.
User avatar
paliometoxo
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8837
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Nicosia, paliometocho

Postby Gasman » Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:55 am

Says a lot of sod all to me. The US apparently gave Turkey the green light to intervene in 1974, but didn't actually come out and say so - did they?
Gasman
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 3561
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 6:18 pm

Postby paliometoxo » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:00 pm

no they even gave them the weapons to invade just not officially
User avatar
paliometoxo
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8837
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Nicosia, paliometocho

Re: US does not back Turkish positions - Clinton

Postby Oracle » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:09 pm

"I can’t speak for our Ambassador, but I assume that he was stating the opinion of the Turkish government. That is something that we do not ascribe to, because we want to see the entire Cyprus situation resolved, but we certainly understand that is the stated position of the Turkish government, not the American government,'' she added.


Excellent response regarding the dipstick 'diplomat' who should be retired from office, immediately!

If their Ambassadors do not represent their views, they should not be in the US government's payroll.

Let Turkey have him -- they clearly pay him!
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby Gasman » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:12 pm

And even told them just how much of Cyprus they could take over without too many problems - didn't they?

And the same went for the UK too?

I don't think most of the rest of the world gives a shit about Cyprus. Those who have to pay lip service to it probably view it as a perpetual thorn in their sides and wish it would just 'go away'.

Discounting Cyprus Home News and Media - it is hardly ever given a mention on any major news channels, or any news buried away somewhere. Yet almost everything and anything concerning Turkey is given worldwide media coverage. Evidenced this week with the couple of stories from Turkey that are splashed all over the news.

I wrongly assumed that (because ex pat Brits were involved, or even because of the Cherie Blair connection) the latest landmark Orams' judgement would have been given good coverage in the UK. None of those I asked had heard about it.

My guess is that most in the UK (and the US) don't even know there are problems in Cyprus, let alone know about the impact of those problems on property and what is happening now.

They either think of Cyprus as a holiday destination or, if they are older, somewhere the Brit Army had to get involved in back in the 50s or 60s or whenever (esp. if they were sent over here - I have an uncle who was - I won't repeat what he says about that lol!) These days a lot of British army bods hope to be sent here for a spell - I've heard it described as the only tour where you can get paid to learn to ski and scuba.
Gasman
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 3561
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 6:18 pm

Postby paliometoxo » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:56 pm

of course not gasman its a tiny island with less then 1 million population the only interest they have is its military men being here for its strategic positioning nothing more they couldent care a less about the people, they allowed the turks to invade and now they suddenly want a solution.

the english did even though they did a lot of damage they did help cyprus they sorted us out so to say they organised us, so they did also help a lot towards cyprus. England has ruled of many countries in the past and left their mark.
User avatar
paliometoxo
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8837
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Nicosia, paliometocho

Postby YFred » Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:25 pm

Gasman wrote:Says a lot of sod all to me. The US apparently gave Turkey the green light to intervene in 1974, but didn't actually come out and say so - did they?

Your pre-occupation with links will be your undoing. I don't need to see the fire to know that one exists, the smoke gives it away, open your eyes, ears and unblock your nose!
User avatar
YFred
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12100
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:22 am
Location: Lurucina-Upon-Thames

Postby runaway » Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:32 pm

If USA had not backed Turkish positions, they would have continued sanctions and maybe invade :lol: us but that has not happened in 40 years and is unlikely to happen in another 400 years. Sweet dreams south cypriots.
User avatar
runaway
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1723
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:41 pm
Location: Istanbul

Next

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest