Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

Zan,

You are laboring under a false assumption, that Enosis remains a valid goal for the GC community. This may be a useful rallying point for partitionists but does not reflect reality. Even a superficial look at any day's press of Cyprus and Greece would dispel such an assumption. But you are stuck in the groove of Enosis, Megali Idea etc and you sound like the lunatic fringe of the most flung out flat earthers of Greek politics.

And to counter this phantom you are ready to accept the intensifying colonisation of the north, the marginalisation of TCs in their own country and ultimate partition. Which is OK with me, as long as someone at some point, officially states that the Turkish side is no longer into this BBF fairy story and puts PARTITION on the table. I want to see the reaction from the international community at that one. And that of Turkey's elite when they realise that a fully independent "south Cyprus" will have absolute claims to its continental shelf and exclusive economic zone. Because you cannot partition and still stake a claim based on the myth of joint ownership.

Remember what the Israeli minister said? "When the Leviathan gas field comes on line the Nabucco pipeline will become a pipe dream. The word Nabucco will remind us of the title of a Verdi opera and nothing else". Cyprus owns half of the field. Which might explain the aversion of Turkey to the word partition.

You want to inflict a change that takes away my rights under the original constitution and Zurich agreement. It creates conflict and has come down to negotiation.

You also again contradict yourself. Does Turkey have an aversion to the word PARTITION or not. If they have then your original statement asking for honesty is rubbish!!!

[denizaksulu]

What the buffoon Erdogan doesn't realise is that Merkel and the EU already knew this.

The idiot has just played right into the hands of those who do not want Turkey by demonstrating exactly what Merkel is talking about.

If this is the best Turkey can do, they might as well stop wasting everyone's time and call it a day with regard to the EU.

You are clearly not going to have your cake and eat it.

You seriously think Erdogan wants EU?? He hates Christians. He has Arab Union in mind.

wot's arab union got to do with turkey? as the forum's resident expert on hate it won't be news to u that arabs loathe turks... especially after u dropped their alphabet for a christian one.

Have you ever been to an Arab country south shitriot? Erdoğan is a hero from Morocco to UAE.

I am surprised that you trust Arabs. Remember the fight for Yemen in the WW1. There are no better backstabbers than Arabs.

[denizaksulu]

"Erdogan is a hero in Arab countries. "

Is that your take on Al Ahram articles about the Davut plans of a new Ottoman sphere of influence? You need to read more. Do you have Arab friends? Do they tell you their view on Davut's ideas?
.

They tell me this on the streets of Arab countries. So let's see: bankrupt hellass won't help u, EU and USA won't help u, Muslim world won't help u. You're not getting KKTC back, not even a gram.

As I said above, the Arabs speak with forked tongue. What they say to your face differs from what they say behind you.....just like politicians. Hate them all.

[Kikapu]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

[zan]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

[DT.]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

What does a Tc nationalist consider an objective these days Zan? Recognition or union with Turkey?

[quattro]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

wrong here Zan the Gc nationalists lost by 70% in AP voting .

[zan]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

What does a Tc nationalist consider an objective these days Zan? Recognition or union with Turkey?

Well! All indications are; Willing to accept a fair union of some sort or recognition or union with Turkey................I think its fair to say , In that order!

[zan]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

wrong here Zan the Gc nationalists lost by 70% in AP voting .

They sure did. If that same 70% had voted yes instead of OXI we might have been on the road AGAIN to total unity!!!!

[DT.]

Just saw Eroglu's proposals for power sharing. They include spearate sovereignty for each constituent state, the power of each to sign internatioanl agreements, the continued guarantees of BOTH states by Turkey, Greece and UK, and a proviso which really is cute: in the event of one state leaving the union it will not remove the satus of the other state.

I would love to hear Bananiot's interpretation of these proposals. No doubt there will be the usual "each new proposal is worse than the last one, it is our fault for not accepting the last one". To which the counter is that the new proposal shows us what the Eroglus had in mind when we were discussing the last one.

While we talk BBF and such bullshit they are really talking partition. IF partition is on the table then let us call it by its name and stop the crap about unitary states and federal structures. Negotiating partition openly and realistically puts a whole different slant on things and changes the international situation radically. Using the word reunification to disguise it obviously helps the invader.

Who is fooling who in this idiotic game anyway?

These are nothing new, Nikitas. This was all in the Annan Plan, albeit disguised, but were in the AP all the same. The NeoPartitionist know that there is no going back to the AP again, so they figured, why not spell out what the AP was all about, but this time in English. As you have also pointed out, Turkey does not want just any partition. They want a partition which allows them to have control over the whole island as well as have influence in the EU through the secessionist state. It is also possible, that Eroglu and Turkey want out of the talks so not to be nagged all the time by world leaders such as Angela Merkel and the UNSG Ban Ki-moon for a solution they cannot deliver adhering to the EU Principles, so why not go "nuclear" with their proposals just to bring the talks to an end, knowing full well they will be rejected by the GCs. Perhaps they are hoping the GCs will get the blame for walking away from the talks to try and get sympathy support from the likes of Jack Straw to try to get direct trade for the north.

BBF with True Federation along with EU Principles can work if both sided really wanted to unify and not seek disguised partition with the terms which you coined the phrase a while back, that the "TCs want to be masters in the north and partners in the south". You see what happens when you give the NeoPartitionist ideas like that, Nikitas.

Well, at least it confirms one thing, that the Taksim Dreams are still alive and well in the north.! I can't imagine any GC would vote for such a plan. Bananiot voted for the AP, which I told him that it was a very irrational vote on his part, specially when he believed and said that "The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it", and if he were to vote for what Eroglu is asking for now in plain English, it will no longer be irrational voting on Bananiot's part, but more like the case of, temporary insanity.!

Most nationalist TCs thought exactly the same Kiks. Seems only your nationalists won!!!

What does a Tc nationalist consider an objective these days Zan? Recognition or union with Turkey?

Well! All indications are; Willing to accept a fair union of some sort or recognition or union with Turkey................I think its fair to say , In that order!

So the TC nationalists have as a first priority a fair union of the island? Why call them nationalists then?