Cyprus-Forum.com

[shahmaran]

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.

Who cares?

Are we actually going to get upset about the fucking French getting kicked out of that area?

If anything they did the Arabs a favor. Those Imperial scum have no right to be anywhere but their own country.

[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.

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.

Who cares?

Are we actually going to get upset about the fucking French getting kicked out of that area?

If anything they did the Arabs a favor. Those Imperial scum have no right to be anywhere but their own country.

If Hatay had gone to Syria as the arabs wanted the French would still have left - so no favour there!

Deniz, thanks for the info about the "bent plebicite", it confirms what I was told had happened.

[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.

Jerry, as you know the Hatay topic was well discussed last year on the cf. There was a lot of Jerrymandering going on at the time. I just added the anecdote as I just re-called it.

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.

Who cares?

Are we actually going to get upset about the fucking French getting kicked out of that area?

If anything they did the Arabs a favor. Those Imperial scum have no right to be anywhere but their own country.

If Hatay had gone to Syria as the arabs wanted the French would still have left - so no favour there!

Deniz, thanks for the info about the "bent plebicite", it confirms what I was told had happened.