Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

But there again shit happens!!

http://euobserver.com/13/30519

[Simon]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

Britain spends 2.5% too. France about 2.3%. Please also remember the small point that no other EU nation has 37% of its territory under occupation! Greece has consistently spent over 3% because of the Turkish threat, so from that standard what should Cyprus be spending? Notwithstanding the above, you cannot compare Cyprus to other EU nations which are not even remotely threatened by any other state, let alone having a huge chunk of territory under occupation.

[zan]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

Britain spends 2.5% too. France about 2.3%. Please also remember the small point that no other EU nation has 37% of its territory under occupation! Greece has consistently spent over 3% because of the Turkish threat, so from that standard what should Cyprus be spending? Notwithstanding the above, you cannot compare Cyprus to other EU nations which are not even remotely threatened by any other state, let alone having a huge chunk of territory under occupation.

But isn't that the point.......You may be at the outer limits but you still have EU waters lapping your shores. Do you really think the rest of the EU are going to allow you to go to war and drag them into it?

[Simon]

Simon, the National Guard's only victory so far was the coup against Makarios in july 1974. Spending more money on the NG will send Cyprus economy packing and in any case, besides GR's rhetoric, running after Turkey in an arms race constitutes a death warrant for Cyprus. Is this so difficult to understand?

Bananiot, I'm addressing the point that there is no strategy to GC thinking. Not only when it comes to the military but in any regard when it comes to the Cyprus problem. Why are we half-heartedly spending on the National Guard? Either fund it properly or don't waste any money. The notion that spending 3% of GDP on defence will send the economy 'packing' is absolute nonsense. This is why we are falling over ourselves making one concession after another, claiming we have already conceded these things in the past so as to pass the buck, whilst all the time Turkey's position and strategy never changes. To say our politicians are incompetent would be an insult to incompetent politicians.

[Simon]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

Britain spends 2.5% too. France about 2.3%. Please also remember the small point that no other EU nation has 37% of its territory under occupation! Greece has consistently spent over 3% because of the Turkish threat, so from that standard what should Cyprus be spending? Notwithstanding the above, you cannot compare Cyprus to other EU nations which are not even remotely threatened by any other state, let alone having a huge chunk of territory under occupation.

But isn't that the point.......You may be at the outer limits but you still have EU waters lapping your shores. Do you really think the rest of the EU are going to allow you to go to war and drag them into it?

You and I both know it's not simply a case of whether the EU will allow a war. And I am not suggesting a war at this stage, but just a strategy with regards to the National Guard which isn't half-hearted. Cyprus has a low peace time budget whilst under occupation. Sounds odd to me. Like I said, if this is because we have decided that it is pointless trying to counter the Turkish military, then scrap the NG! Why waste $550 million every year?!

[zan]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

Britain spends 2.5% too. France about 2.3%. Please also remember the small point that no other EU nation has 37% of its territory under occupation! Greece has consistently spent over 3% because of the Turkish threat, so from that standard what should Cyprus be spending? Notwithstanding the above, you cannot compare Cyprus to other EU nations which are not even remotely threatened by any other state, let alone having a huge chunk of territory under occupation.

But isn't that the point.......You may be at the outer limits but you still have EU waters lapping your shores. Do you really think the rest of the EU are going to allow you to go to war and drag them into it?

You and I both know it's not simply a case of whether the EU will allow a war. And I am not suggesting a war at this stage, but just a strategy with regards to the National Guard which isn't half-hearted. Cyprus has a low peace time budget whilst under occupation. Sounds odd to me. Like I said, if this is because we have decided that it is pointless trying to counter the Turkish military, then scrap the NG! Why waste $550 million every year?!

I have not studied it but there must be some mechanism put into place, like a war comity, in the EU that requires a vote on such matters. I know you can go it alone but that would have it's consequences. I believe that is one of the reasons that "Cyprus" was allowed into the EU. Turkey would not attack an EU country so...Stale mate....Where we are today...


As For "Cyprus' defence strategy....I suppose they are doing the best they can given the pressure they feel for defence, in their own right and an obligation to the EU as there is no joint fighting force yet. Balance that with EU financial pressures.........I suppose it's a fine line to walk.

[Simon]

Nothing happened in 63, nothing happened in 67, and nothing happened in 74 even, compared to what CAN happen in 2010+ because times have changed…

GR, how about Cyprus properly investing in its military first. I mean we spend 1.8% of our GDP on defence, when 37% of our country is under military occupation! Ridiculous really. That figure should be doubled instantly for starters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Some may say there is no point spending more because we can't defend ourselves against Turkey in any event, but if that is the case, why bother having an armed forces at all and wasting even one penny?

Either way, it reflects a pervasive problem which saturates the GC side, lack of clear direction and strategy.

what sort of cap does the EU put on defence spending???

Put it this way, Greece spends over 3%. I am not aware of any such cap, especially when your country is under military occupation. I know there are some limits on equipment, i.e. tanks etc, but not aware of any on spending. Even if there are, 1.8% would be well below any threshold.

A quick look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures (I Think) shows that apart from Greece, all EU countries are in the ball park with "Cyprus".

Britain spends 2.5% too. France about 2.3%. Please also remember the small point that no other EU nation has 37% of its territory under occupation! Greece has consistently spent over 3% because of the Turkish threat, so from that standard what should Cyprus be spending? Notwithstanding the above, you cannot compare Cyprus to other EU nations which are not even remotely threatened by any other state, let alone having a huge chunk of territory under occupation.

But isn't that the point.......You may be at the outer limits but you still have EU waters lapping your shores. Do you really think the rest of the EU are going to allow you to go to war and drag them into it?

You and I both know it's not simply a case of whether the EU will allow a war. And I am not suggesting a war at this stage, but just a strategy with regards to the National Guard which isn't half-hearted. Cyprus has a low peace time budget whilst under occupation. Sounds odd to me. Like I said, if this is because we have decided that it is pointless trying to counter the Turkish military, then scrap the NG! Why waste $550 million every year?!

I have not studied it but there must be some mechanism put into place, like a war comity, in the EU that requires a vote on such matters. I know you can go it alone but that would have it's consequences. I believe that is one of the reasons that "Cyprus" was allowed into the EU. Turkey would not attack an EU country so...Stale mate....Where we are today...


As For "Cyprus' defence strategy....I suppose they are doing the best they can given the pressure they feel for defence, in their own right and an obligation to the EU as there is no joint fighting force yet. Balance that with EU financial pressures.........I suppose it's a fine line to walk.

There is no EU defence committee that votes on whether an EU member state should go to war zan, I'm not sure where you're getting this from. You are overestimating quite substantially EU defence co-operation. There are the EU battlegroups of 1500 men that can be sent in a crisis but that's as far as it goes. Going to war is the choice of each member state. Obviously, if the whole EU was asked to go to war, decisions would have to be made by each member state. Perhaps the small battlegroups would be used for small EU operations. EU defence co-operation hasn't got too far due to NATO and particularly Britain. But this is all off topic.

With regards to a balance on defence strategy, 1.8% is a very low figure in Cyprus' circumstances. I don't believe that's any kind of balance at all. Even NATO suggests its members spend at least 2% of GDP on defence, and like I said, most of them have no serious security threats. Israel spends something like 7%! Even their situation isn't as dire as Cyprus. They're the occupier rather than the occupied.

[AmericanGC]

The Cyprus Guard was preparing to build a military deterrent in the mid nineties. The Russian S-300 missile defense system was part of this. The TAF freaked out because it would of put a end to Turkish air superiority. I was in the US military during this time. The intelligence on the S-300 was it was very effective on F-16s. The Cyprus government should have called Turkey on their threat. The Russians where sending a Naval task force with aircraft and subs. The US and NATO did not support Turkey on a attack and held intelligence on the S-300. The Turks went to Israel for help. A big opportunity was missed. As soon as Cyprus moves close to a real deterrence Turkey makes threats same when Greek forces increase military on Cyprus.

[Simon]

The Cyprus Guard was preparing to build a military deterrent in the mid nineties. The Russian S-300 missile defense system was part of this. The TAF freaked out because it would of put a end to Turkish air superiority. I was in the US military during this time. The intelligence on the S-300 was it was very effective on F-16s. The Cyprus government should have called Turkey on their threat. The Russians where sending a Naval task force with aircraft and subs. The US and NATO did not support Turkey on a attack and held intelligence on the S-300. The Turks went to Israel for help. A big opportunity was missed. As soon as Cyprus moves close to a real deterrence Turkey makes threats same when Greek forces increase military on Cyprus.

Precisely my point. No strategy. They made the order then pulled out when Turkey resorted to its usual bully boy tactics. Half-hearted as I was saying before. Either see it through or don't make the order. It's laughable that Turkey can overload the island with US military hardware that shouldn't even be on the island, that's right, surprise surprise, they used US made weapons illegally, but the slightest chance of Cyprus getting some capability to defend itself and it is shock and horror. The word 'hypocrisy' doesn't seem to do it justice.

[bigOz]

The Cyprus Guard was preparing to build a military deterrent in the mid nineties. The Russian S-300 missile defense system was part of this. The TAF freaked out because it would of put a end to Turkish air superiority. I was in the US military during this time. The intelligence on the S-300 was it was very effective on F-16s. The Cyprus government should have called Turkey on their threat. The Russians where sending a Naval task force with aircraft and subs. The US and NATO did not support Turkey on a attack and held intelligence on the S-300. The Turks went to Israel for help. A big opportunity was missed. As soon as Cyprus moves close to a real deterrence Turkey makes threats same when Greek forces increase military on Cyprus.

Precisely my point. No strategy. They made the order then pulled out when Turkey resorted to its usual bully boy tactics. Half-hearted as I was saying before. Either see it through or don't make the order. It's laughable that Turkey can overload the island with US military hardware that shouldn't even be on the island, that's right, surprise surprise, they used US made weapons illegally, but the slightest chance of Cyprus getting some capability to defend itself and it is shock and horror. The word 'hypocrisy' doesn't seem to do it justice.

What a load of rubbish!
Do you know Turkish airforce has well over 1000 aircraft! How many missiles can Cyprus afford and where exactly were they going to station them?
Are you also aware Turkey is also in possession of pilotless - remote controlled reconnaissance planes? Who is going to stop them from surgical surprise attack on such sites - that would pose a threat to its aircraft flying over Turkey? (blowing them to smitherines). It was real threat of this that made the GC authorities do a U-turn rather than help from anywhere else!

Yes! I agree you should stop wasting your money on NG because they are no match for the Turkish military power if any such (highly unlikely) conflict were to take place!

BTW! I read that 5 of the new recruits fainted during graduation of the NG trainees the other day!
Just make sure you decide to use these boys against Turkish forces on a nice cool day - when the sun is not too high!