Cyprus-Forum.com

[paliometoxo]

because they want two states and control over the south while we have no say in the north and them have a president in south also

[shahmaran]

because they want two states and control over the south while we have no say in the north and them have a president in south also

If we have 2 states Turkey will have no say on Cyprus anymore.

You however, want total control and you already have a say over the North outside Cyprus.

More than what we have

[CopperLine]

Pallio: It's not good mate. With Turkey being a major aggressor power in the region it could be bad news for everyone concerned in that they may start a war again. This time it could be catastrophic, for the many thousands of innocent civilians falling victim to the Turkish gun. War is awful and so is Turkey.

No, the historical record of Turkey since its foundation is that it has respected the Lausanne borders and has made no territorial claims on any of its neighbours (unlike Greece, Bulgaria, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iran, Iraq and Syria); was neutral for most of the second world war (unlike all the above with the arguable exception of Iran); and with the exception of the Cyprus question and counter-PKK operations in Iraq has not acted for itself militarily outside Turkey.

So it is straightforward wrong to say that Turkey has been or is an aggressor power, never mind a major aggressor.

Really? Hatay? Imvros & Tenedos? F16 Flights over Greek islands? Claims to exploration rights in disputed areas of the sea? And of course the mass exodus of Greeks from Istanbul doesn't really count as aggression does it?
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news- ... ching.html

Jerry,
As you well know the incorporation of Hatay into Turkey was the subject of a plebicite prompted by the League of Nations and overseen by the League. The result was an overwhelming vote for incorporation into Turkey. This is hardly an example of aggression.

If you are going to extend the meaning of aggression to internal actions, such as the anti-Greek expulsions of the 1950s, then one should apply the same criteria for the neighbours. If one does, then again Turkey comes out less bad than almost all its neighbours.

Claiming a right to exploration is not an act of aggression by any stretch of the imagination.

I know that many people on this forum would like the picture of Turkey to be even bleaker that it is, but It is simply mistaken to say that Turkey is a major aggressor. People would be advised to take a look at the broader history of the region and Europe than insular Cyprus.

[Get Real!]

If you are going to extend the meaning of aggression to internal actions, such as the anti-Greek expulsions of the 1950s, then one should apply the same criteria for the neighbours. If one does, then again Turkey comes out less bad than almost all its neighbours.

If it were not for the abysmal Israeli track record, Turkey would definitely take first place in the region!

Rough timeline of Turkish aggression…

1950..1953 The Korean War
1960 Military coup
1963 Aerial bombardment of Cyprus
1971 Military coup
1974 Invasion & Occupation of Cyprus
1980 Military coup
1984 Anti-PKK operations commence
1995 Invasion & occupation of Greek island Imia
1997 Military coup
1999 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2001 Turkey’s military involvement in Afghanistan commences
2003 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2008 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2010 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq

[Jerry]

Pallio: It's not good mate. With Turkey being a major aggressor power in the region it could be bad news for everyone concerned in that they may start a war again. This time it could be catastrophic, for the many thousands of innocent civilians falling victim to the Turkish gun. War is awful and so is Turkey.

No, the historical record of Turkey since its foundation is that it has respected the Lausanne borders and has made no territorial claims on any of its neighbours (unlike Greece, Bulgaria, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iran, Iraq and Syria); was neutral for most of the second world war (unlike all the above with the arguable exception of Iran); and with the exception of the Cyprus question and counter-PKK operations in Iraq has not acted for itself militarily outside Turkey.

So it is straightforward wrong to say that Turkey has been or is an aggressor power, never mind a major aggressor.

Really? Hatay? Imvros & Tenedos? F16 Flights over Greek islands? Claims to exploration rights in disputed areas of the sea? And of course the mass exodus of Greeks from Istanbul doesn't really count as aggression does it?
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news- ... ching.html

Jerry,
As you well know the incorporation of Hatay into Turkey was the subject of a plebicite prompted by the League of Nations and overseen by the League. The result was an overwhelming vote for incorporation into Turkey. This is hardly an example of aggression.

If you are going to extend the meaning of aggression to internal actions, such as the anti-Greek expulsions of the 1950s, then one should apply the same criteria for the neighbours. If one does, then again Turkey comes out less bad than almost all its neighbours.

Claiming a right to exploration is not an act of aggression by any stretch of the imagination.

I know that many people on this forum would like the picture of Turkey to be even bleaker that it is, but It is simply mistaken to say that Turkey is a major aggressor. People would be advised to take a look at the broader history of the region and Europe than insular Cyprus.

And you know that the "plebicite" in Hatay was not an honest reflection of the wishes of the 60% arab majority. France bent the rules to appease Turkey, even the League of Nations election commision accepted that Turkish voters were in the minority. No doubt the presence of Turkish soldiers in Hatay affected the result, I'd call that "subtle" aggression. According to my source the majority was wafer thin.

Bearing in mind the tens (hundreds?) of thousands of Greeks who have left Turkey since the 1950s perhaps you could enlighten us as to who has carried out fewer expulsions. Perhaps the "aggression" of those countries you mention could be linked to the fact that as former subjects of the sultan they were merely trying to get back what was theirs.

Threats to stop others from exploring for oil is, in my opinion, an act of aggression, especially when it comes from a regional super-power.

[denizaksulu]

Pallio: It's not good mate. With Turkey being a major aggressor power in the region it could be bad news for everyone concerned in that they may start a war again. This time it could be catastrophic, for the many thousands of innocent civilians falling victim to the Turkish gun. War is awful and so is Turkey.

No, the historical record of Turkey since its foundation is that it has respected the Lausanne borders and has made no territorial claims on any of its neighbours (unlike Greece, Bulgaria, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iran, Iraq and Syria); was neutral for most of the second world war (unlike all the above with the arguable exception of Iran); and with the exception of the Cyprus question and counter-PKK operations in Iraq has not acted for itself militarily outside Turkey.

So it is straightforward wrong to say that Turkey has been or is an aggressor power, never mind a major aggressor.

Really? Hatay? Imvros & Tenedos? F16 Flights over Greek islands? Claims to exploration rights in disputed areas of the sea? And of course the mass exodus of Greeks from Istanbul doesn't really count as aggression does it?
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news- ... ching.html

Jerry,
As you well know the incorporation of Hatay into Turkey was the subject of a plebicite prompted by the League of Nations and overseen by the League. The result was an overwhelming vote for incorporation into Turkey. This is hardly an example of aggression.

If you are going to extend the meaning of aggression to internal actions, such as the anti-Greek expulsions of the 1950s, then one should apply the same criteria for the neighbours. If one does, then again Turkey comes out less bad than almost all its neighbours.

Claiming a right to exploration is not an act of aggression by any stretch of the imagination.

I know that many people on this forum would like the picture of Turkey to be even bleaker that it is, but It is simply mistaken to say that Turkey is a major aggressor. People would be advised to take a look at the broader history of the region and Europe than insular Cyprus.

And you know that the "plebicite" in Hatay was not an honest reflection of the wishes of the 60% arab majority. France bent the rules to appease Turkey, even the League of Nations election commision accepted that Turkish voters were in the minority. No doubt the presence of Turkish soldiers in Hatay affected the result, I'd call that "subtle" aggression. According to my source the majority was wafer thin.

Bearing in mind the tens (hundreds?) of thousands of Greeks who have left Turkey since the 1950s perhaps you could enlighten us as to who has carried out fewer expulsions. Perhaps the "aggression" of those countries you mention could be linked to the fact that as former subjects of the sultan they were merely trying to get back what was theirs.

Threats to stop others from exploring for oil is, in my opinion, an act of aggression, especially when it comes from a regional super-power.

My understanding of the Hatay issue is that 30,000 T were 'bussed in' prior to the 'plebiscite'. My teacher considered this as a clever ruse.

[runaway]

1995 Invasion & occupation of Greek island Imia

poor soul of the hell-enic propaganda. We got back our island of KARDAK.

[Hermes]

It's not just the US...

State of Denial: It’s time for Israel to rethink its rejection of the Armenian Genocide

The question remains: Is aiding Turkey’s denial of a genocidal past something Israel can continue to do? And at what cost? Amos Elon, writing in Haaretz about the “hypocrisy, opportunism, and moral trepidation” of Israeli collusion with Turkey, put it well when he asked: “But where is the boundary between the natural chauvinism of exploitation and the cheap opportunism of hypocrisy? What happens when the survivors of one Holocaust make political deals over the bitter memory of the survivors of another Holocaust?”

http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/47798/state-of-denial/

[Get Real!]

Germans Overwhelmingly against Turkey's EU Accession

More than two-thirds of the Germany citizens are against Turkey's EU entry, according to a poll, whose results emerged as Turkish PM Erdogan met Chancellor Merkel in Berlin.

69% of the Germans do not want to see Turkey in the EU, according to a survey of Emnid Institute while only 27% back this idea, reported Die Welt.

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=120959


Armenian Genocide US card against Turkey

With already-troubled Turkey-U.S. ties further challenged by NATO plans for a missile defense system, Washington is now attempting to use one of the touchiest issues in the two countries’ relationship to gain Turkish cooperation.

Frustrated by the growing divergence of views, the United States has warned Turkey that it will not be able to block the adoption by the U.S. Congress of a resolution based on Armenian genocide claims, the Hürriyet Daily informs.

http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2010 ... mn-turqia/

[shahmaran]

If you are going to extend the meaning of aggression to internal actions, such as the anti-Greek expulsions of the 1950s, then one should apply the same criteria for the neighbours. If one does, then again Turkey comes out less bad than almost all its neighbours.

If it were not for the abysmal Israeli track record, Turkey would definitely take first place in the region!

Rough timeline of Turkish aggression…

1950..1953 The Korean War
1960 Military coup
1963 Aerial bombardment of Cyprus
1971 Military coup
1974 Invasion & Occupation of Cyprus
1980 Military coup
1984 Anti-PKK operations commence
1995 Invasion & occupation of Greek island Imia
1997 Military coup
1999 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2001 Turkey’s military involvement in Afghanistan commences
2003 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2008 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq
2010 Anti-Kurd operations in Iraq

Thats bullshit, Turkey fought with the Allies to liberate Korea from China's terror. Just like she is in Afghanistan, Except there they never fight, they are there as Muslim mediators, have you ever heard an attack on the Turkish army in Afghanistan? It is almost always US or British.

I know Cyprus is too small to actually get involved with real world issues so don't be jealous. All you have to worry about is the few left over Muslims you need to get rid off and ripping the world off with bad quality hellim

Cyprus was bombed because you were taken over by a Greek fascist junta who openly expressed that he was going to eradicate us and unite whats left with Greece, not going to happen so shut it.

The military coups Turkey went through are her internal problems, nothing to do with her being "aggressive", one of them was openly supported by the CIA, it was again a Left Right issue.

The Anti-PKK ordeals are just, considering the PKK has been attacking every country within that region for decades now, they are recognized as a terrorist organization by probably everyone but Cyprus

Your list consists of nothing but personal grudge and bullshit propaganda get a new one!

Make one of Cyprus while you are on it