Cyprus-Forum.com

[BirKibrisli]

Birkibrisli gardash, I have found the way to keep my bodily and spiritual balance. Do not talk with confirmed morons. You should do the same.

I am sure you are right,dear Bananiot..
Some people are not worth spitting on...But you feel great if you do spit on them...

Believe me,I am trying to follow your advice...sometimes it is not possible..

[YFred]

Birkibrisli gardash, I have found the way to keep my bodily and spiritual balance. Do not talk with confirmed morons. You should do the same.

seems a bit harsh for poor old yfronts.

From this point on you shall have that treatment. See if it makes any difference. I doubt it but I am trying to help tou you understand.

How could we have a laugh without you, unthinkable, what?

[Paphitis]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

[YFred]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Yeah right dream on. Lets see what develops in the next 12 months. Starting with direct trade regulation implementation. If they don't do it the whole of eu can go to hell. Who needs them? We've done without them till this point and we'll survive to for a few more days yet with them or without them. Get my drift.

[BirKibrisli]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Ready to talk without insults??? Good...I will tell you what the TC community want...They want to be able to live in their homeland as equal citizens,without having to worry about their physical or emotional security,without justifying their existence,and without having to keep watching their backs in case their GC compatriots are planning to place another political knife there,just like in the 50s and 60s and early 70s...Now you tell me what the GC community wants,,and convince those who voted for Eroglu that you are sincere this time...

[Paphitis]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Yeah right dream on. Lets see what develops in the next 12 months. Starting with direct trade regulation implementation. If they don't do it the whole of eu can go to hell. Who needs them? We've done without them till this point and we'll survive to for a few more days yet with them or without them. Get my drift.

Fine by me!

Don't start crying when you realise it is all a pipe dream and that any trade will be occurring if and only the RoC agrees to it, and through RoC controlled ports. You can't defeat fundamental legalities sunshine!

[Paphitis]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Ready to talk without insults??? Good...I will tell you what the TC community want...They want to be able to live in their homeland as equal citizens,without having to worry about their physical or emotional security,without justifying their existence,and without having to keep watching their backs in case their GC compatriots are planning to place another political knife there,just like in the 50s and 60s and early 70s...Now you tell me what the GC community wants,,and convince those who voted for Eroglu that you are sincere this time...

It was you that was insulting!

I just called you stupid!

[YFred]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Yeah right dream on. Lets see what develops in the next 12 months. Starting with direct trade regulation implementation. If they don't do it the whole of eu can go to hell. Who needs them? We've done without them till this point and we'll survive to for a few more days yet with them or without them. Get my drift.

Fine by me!

Don't start crying when you realise it is all a pipe dream and that any trade will be occurring if and only the RoC agrees to it, and through RoC controlled ports. You can't defeat fundamental legalities sunshine!

But we can cylindrecise them and shove up into your nether regions, what?

[BirKibrisli]

I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...

Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...

What is a "compromise" according to you?

If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?

If TCs believe that giving some land back to the rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.

I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.

If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...

Your stupidity really amazes me.

Who cares about the 1959 agreements? The situation was unworkable, and now it is all over.

The question is this. Do the TCs want Partition, or do they want a unified state or a proper BBF?

Since all indications are that most of you want Partition, then you better offer something very tangible and fair, so that your proposals can be unanimously accepted. Otherwise, we just continue as we are. The choice is yours really!

Listen ,you shithead...Because you are too thick to understand what Piratis and I are talking about,you cannot go around calling people "stupid"...got it,stupid????
Now go to your room and play with your model planes,especially designed for the intellectually challenged..

It is very unfortunate to rad such one sided debate in terms of intelligence. Piratis has given you some very clear definitions, but you are too stupid to realise and are incapable to simplify things into what is real. You don't wouldn't know reality if came and spat in your face.

The possible scenarios can be whittled down to just 3-4, including status quo. Even this is acceptable to us if we don't have a better alternative.

It is the TCs that don't know what they want, and if they do, they don't know how to achieve a result. It is your community that needs to work things out, because we are quite happy to keep the status quo for as long as it takes. If you want agreed Partition, then you know how to achieve this. If you want a BBF, then you know how to compromise in order to achieve a workable BBF acceptable to both communities.

Otherwise, the status quo continues to the day you die, stupid!

No need to complicate things.

We are trying to have a constructive discussion here about the background to the Eroglu victory...It is obviously too complicated for your level of intelligence,dingbat...So bat out and go and do some finger painting,there is a good fellow...Careful...Don't bump your head on the edge of the table..There you go...And stop fingering your arse...I've told you a million times you can't paint with or eat what comes out of that hole...

And how would you or Piratis know the background on Eroglu's victory?

TCs voted in a hardliner because they grew tired of Talat's empty promises. I am not willing to talk on behalf of 160,000 people, as many would have differing reasons as to the way they vote.

The issue is this. What does the TC community want? Is it agreed Partition? I believe this is the case for most of you.

Well, you know what to do. You need our signature, otherwise we just continue as is! Either way, you have much more to lose!

Ready to talk without insults??? Good...I will tell you what the TC community want...They want to be able to live in their homeland as equal citizens,without having to worry about their physical or emotional security,without justifying their existence,and without having to keep watching their backs in case their GC compatriots are planning to place another political knife there,just like in the 50s and 60s and early 70s...Now you tell me what the GC community wants,,and convince those who voted for Eroglu that you are sincere this time...

It was you that was insulting!

I just called you stupid!

Stupid is not an insult in your language,good...I will call you Stupido from now on...

[Paphitis]

Fine by me!

Don't start crying when you realise it is all a pipe dream and that any trade will be occurring if and only the RoC agrees to it, and through RoC controlled ports. You can't defeat fundamental legalities sunshine!

But we can cylindrecise them and shove up into your nether regions, what?

Oh you hurt my feelings....

BIR, this is what you call an insult!