Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Would you accept a book that made NO mention of anything before July 20th 1974? If you do, then lets write that part of history only. Would you be fine with that?

i'll accept a bit of preamble but if i buy a book about the invasion the most preamble id expect is the coup and political to and fro just before.

2 questions:

1) What you say is strange, since most TCs use events from 63 and even before to justify the invasion and the occupation. Would you say to your fellow TC members in here that those events were irrelevant?

2)In that preamble about the coup, what would you expect to find. Maybe some sort of excuse/reason for the invasion? Would you accept a similar preamble that would justify/excuse the events of 63-74 because of what happened before?

So in order to write this book we have to agree on this preamble. How can we agree (even if it was possible), if we didn't discuss about it?

[gabaston]

yeah but that book would be

"reasons behind the invasion". or events leading to the invasion.

big film D-Day it wasnt about germany invading poland or treatment of jews it was about d-day, a small bit about the planning of it, a bit about waiting for the right weather, but 90% was about that invasion.

[garbitsch]

Are we going to study Ottoman history as a justification for what had happened to Turkish Cypriots during 63-74 period? I won't have a problem if we start the problem with the Ottoman occupation. Yet, this cannot be an excuse for the actions against T.Cs by the Junta backed EOKA - B. On the other hand, the coup and pre 74 period are directly related to Turkish intervention's first step. The second landing and the eventual division can be studied at a broader perspective. Still I see no relevance between the Ottoman's harsh rule in Cyprus and the events broke out in 60s and 70s.

[Piratis]

yeah but that book would be

"reasons behind the invasion". or events leading to the invasion.

big film D-Day it wasnt about germany invading poland or treatment of jews it was about d-day, a small bit about the planning of it, a bit about waiting for the right weather, but 90% was about that invasion.

Yes, and the discussion here would be the history of the Cyprus problem which includes the time when the Ottoman ruled.

Yet, this cannot be an excuse for the actions against T.Cs by the Junta backed EOKA - B.

We have to evaluate everything equally, not with double standards. You can't say that the Ottoman harsh rule was not an excuse and then claim that the occupation of Cyprus 40 years after the events of 63 is excused.

[cypezokyli]

ehm.
i have to agree with piratis on that one.


[quote="Piratis

[

quote]Yet, this cannot be an excuse for the actions against T.Cs by the Junta backed EOKA - B.

"We have to evaluate everything equally, not with double standards. You can't say that the Ottoman harsh rule was not an excuse and then claim that the occupation of Cyprus 40 years after the events of 63 is excused.[/quote]"

look in the forum, we are accusing each other about the events between 60-74 or 55-74 or... and still most of us were at the time too young either to oppress to kill or even remember. the truth is that most of us heard - did not see. even if i wanted to oppress i was not even born in 1974!!! but many times it is said "i cannot trust u bc of 1963" . and ofcource vise -versa. u took our houses and bla bla adn we cannot trust u

it seems the actions of our ancestors are a sign of our behavior for you, and the same it is for us. i dont know if it should be like that but it is. and i guess it was like that in the 60s. its a vicious circle and i dont know how we can get out of it.
any ideas of how we can pput the past back ?
not forget , but to learn and not repeat?

[gabaston]

piratis

maybe i havent followed this thread.

if you are writng the entire history of cypus you write about ottomans as well as the others.

if you write a book about the invasion you write one chapter preamble, then the rest about the invasion - simple