Cyprus-Forum.com

[Don Kelley]

Are we the only ones who complain about Imperialist Britain, its Empire and its atrocities? This discussion has (so far) centered on the political history of Britain and it's only you who seems to think they were blameless. No one "loves to hate" anyone but no one should be forced to tolerate wrongdoings; by Britain or by bullies like you. And yes you do turn to personal-bashing; full of bitterness (even when you don't know what you are talking about regarding the accusations you make).

Maybe a few months under the Nazis during WWII would have taught you a thing or two; "Come back Great Britain" comes to mind.

[Jerry]

Interesting clip here, it refers to Macmillan's idea early in 1956 that Britain did not need the whole island, just a base.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... cxa4Z1mics

The video refers to the second half of 1957 when they were having to negotiate with EOKA.

Thank you for pointing out my typo error Oracle. Macmillan became PM in Jan 1957, I don't know when he decided on base rather than whole island though.

[kimon07]

So where were all these heros who defeated the British Empire when the Turks Invaded in 74? I keep asking but all I get is bleating, blaming excuses.

This question calls for a new topic like: Why was the Turkish invasion successful or something like that. I suggest we start it as soon as we conclude this one and I will happily participate.

[kimon07]

Just think what you'd be doing today under the Fascist nazis or Mussolinis fascists.

Indeed! Just think what if.....

Winston Churchill:

"If it were not for the bravery of the Greeks and their courage, the outcome of WWII would be undetermined." (Paraphrased from one of his speeches to the British Parliament on 24 April 1941)

Sir Robert Antony Eden, Minister of War and the Exterior of Britain 1940-1945, Prime Minister of Britain 1955-1957:

"Regardless of what the future historians shall say, what we can say now, is that Greece gave Mussolini an unforgettable lesson, that she was the motive for the revolution in Yugoslavia, that she held the Germans in the mainland and in Crete for six weeks, that she upset the chronological order of all German High Command's plans and thus brought a general reversal of the entire course of the war and we won." (Paraphrased from a speech of his to the British parliament on 24/09/1942)

Sir Harold Leofric George Alexander, British Marshal during WWII:

"It would not be an exaggeration to say that Greece upset the plans of Germany in their entirety forcing her to postpone the attack on Russia for six weeks. We wonder what would have been Soviet Union's position without Greece." (Paraphrased from a speech of his to the British parliament on 28 October 1941)

George VI, King of Great Britain 1936-1952:

"The magnificent struggle of Greece, was the first big turn of WWII" (Paraphrased from a speech of his to the parliament in May 1945)

Joseph Vissarionovich Tzougasvili Stalin:
"I am sorry because I am getting old and I shall not live long to thank the Greek People, whose resistance decided WWII." (From a speech of his broadcast by the Moscow radio station on 31 January 1943 after the victory of Stalingrad and the capitulation of marshal Paulus)

Georgy Constantinovich Zhoucov 1896-1974 Marshal of the Soviet Army:
"If the Russian people managed to raise resistance at the doors of Moscow, to halt and reverse the German torrent, they owe it to the Greek People, who delayed the German divisions during the time they could bring us to our knees." (Quote from his memoirs on WWII)

Moscow, Radio Station to Greece:
"You fought unarmed and won, small against big. We owe you gratitude, because you gave us time to defend ourselves. As Russians and as people we thank you." (When Hitler attacked the U.S.S.R.)

http://www.xing.com/net/xinggr/experien ... e-5878719/

[GreekIslandGirl]

Are we the only ones who complain about Imperialist Britain, its Empire and its atrocities? This discussion has (so far) centered on the political history of Britain and it's only you who seems to think they were blameless. No one "loves to hate" anyone but no one should be forced to tolerate wrongdoings; by Britain or by bullies like you. And yes you do turn to personal-bashing; full of bitterness (even when you don't know what you are talking about regarding the accusations you make).

Maybe a few months under the Nazis during WWII would have taught you a thing or two; "Come back Great Britain" comes to mind.

As I recall, it was Great Britain who sought to extricate herself from the Treaty of Guarantee which might entail her having to face any Turkish Invasions (breathed a sigh of relief in 1964 ans 1967 that the USA did GB's job in seeing off the threats of Turkish invasions). In fact, the direct orders in 1974 were for all the British Forces including the brave UNFICYP to take cover in the Bases on the understanding that the Turks would leave them alone there.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Interesting clip here, it refers to Macmillan's idea early in 1956 that Britain did not need the whole island, just a base.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... cxa4Z1mics

The video refers to the second half of 1957 when they were having to negotiate with EOKA.

Thank you for pointing out my typo error Oracle. Macmillan became PM in Jan 1957, I don't know when he decided on base rather than whole island though.

From one of your sources the discussion in 1958 by Macmillan and Co was on offering a base to the Turks:

"The Turks, he said, are completely unapproachable in the matter of giving up partition for a base on the island."

Later, they said this:

"HMG remains determined to hold military bases needed for defense against USSR."

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/frus/frus ... prus2.html

[Jerry]

As I recall, it was Great Britain who sought to extricate herself from the Treaty of Guarantee which might entail her having to face any Turkish Invasions (breathed a sigh of relief in 1964 ans 1967 that the USA did GB's job in seeing off the threats of Turkish invasions). In fact, the direct orders in 1974 were for all the British Forces including the brave UNFICYP to take cover in the Bases on the understanding that the Turks would leave them alone there.

That's not how Callaghan reported events in his memoirs. I would imagine that Kissinger's refusal to support the threat of military action is one of the reasons why GCs accuse him of being responsible for the illegal division and occupation of the island.


"I told Hartman that I had earlier made clear to Ecevit that although the British troops facing them were wearing United Nations berets, they would stand their ground in face of a Turkish Army encroachment and my country would not be prepared to see them pushed aside. Since that conversation the Turks had been heavily reinforced, but Britain was ready to strengthen a static defence against possible lines of Turkish advance by moving in more reinforcements and flying in further Phantoms. I would repeat the warning to the Turks on whom would fall the onus of challenging the United Nations, but I must be assured of American support if I were to do so, and in the light of our conversation this would apparently not be forthcoming. I continued that I understood American concern with the broad issues of the south-east flank of NATO but the United States was ignoring other perspectives, including Britain's role as a Guarantor Power and the safeguarding of the lives of thousands of British citizens.
As soon as Arthur Hartman had left, I fired off a telegram to Henry Kissinger, saying that these important differences were impairing our mutual confidence. I reiterated that it was not sufficient to approach the Turks solely through the medium of diplomacy. The correct policy was to tackle them on parallel lines, namely to convince them that we were in earnest on both the diplomatic and the military level. This was the most likely way to achieve results. As to his complaint that the British had introduced a military dimension, I reminded him that the reality was that this dimension was constantly hanging over the heads of the British troops who were heavily outnumbered by up to twenty-five thousand Turkish soldiers.
Kissinger's response was to telephone Ecevit once more to renew his personal plea that Turkey should adhere to a political solution, telling him that he could expect no support if the Turks made a military move and that the United States would mount a major diplomatic effort to halt them. Kissinger told me that he would give every support to British efforts to save the crisis by diplomatic means, but he did not consider threats of military action either helpful or appropriate, as they distracted attention from the political options. I recognised both Henry's ability and the influence of America, which had been very considerable in securing the cease-fire on 22 July, but I was convinced that more would be needed on this occasion. The only thing that might deter the Turks was the conviction that they would face military opposition if they attempted to advance further."
http://web.archive.org/web/200610121950 ... laghan.htm

[GreekIslandGirl]

As I recall, it was Great Britain who sought to extricate herself from the Treaty of Guarantee which might entail her having to face any Turkish Invasions (breathed a sigh of relief in 1964 ans 1967 that the USA did GB's job in seeing off the threats of Turkish invasions). In fact, the direct orders in 1974 were for all the British Forces including the brave UNFICYP to take cover in the Bases on the understanding that the Turks would leave them alone there.

That's not how Callaghan reported events in his memoirs. I would imagine that Kissinger's refusal to support the threat of military action is one of the reasons why GCs accuse him of being responsible for the illegal division and occupation of the island.


"I told Hartman that I had earlier made clear to Ecevit that although the British troops facing them were wearing United Nations berets, they would stand their ground in face of a Turkish Army encroachment and my country would not be prepared to see them pushed aside. Since that conversation the Turks had been heavily reinforced, but Britain was ready to strengthen a static defence against possible lines of Turkish advance by moving in more reinforcements and flying in further Phantoms. I would repeat the warning to the Turks on whom would fall the onus of challenging the United Nations, but I must be assured of American support if I were to do so, and in the light of our conversation this would apparently not be forthcoming. I continued that I understood American concern with the broad issues of the south-east flank of NATO but the United States was ignoring other perspectives, including Britain's role as a Guarantor Power and the safeguarding of the lives of thousands of British citizens.
As soon as Arthur Hartman had left, I fired off a telegram to Henry Kissinger, saying that these important differences were impairing our mutual confidence. I reiterated that it was not sufficient to approach the Turks solely through the medium of diplomacy. The correct policy was to tackle them on parallel lines, namely to convince them that we were in earnest on both the diplomatic and the military level. This was the most likely way to achieve results. As to his complaint that the British had introduced a military dimension, I reminded him that the reality was that this dimension was constantly hanging over the heads of the British troops who were heavily outnumbered by up to twenty-five thousand Turkish soldiers.
Kissinger's response was to telephone Ecevit once more to renew his personal plea that Turkey should adhere to a political solution, telling him that he could expect no support if the Turks made a military move and that the United States would mount a major diplomatic effort to halt them. Kissinger told me that he would give every support to British efforts to save the crisis by diplomatic means, but he did not consider threats of military action either helpful or appropriate, as they distracted attention from the political options. I recognised both Henry's ability and the influence of America, which had been very considerable in securing the cease-fire on 22 July, but I was convinced that more would be needed on this occasion. The only thing that might deter the Turks was the conviction that they would face military opposition if they attempted to advance further."
http://web.archive.org/web/200610121950 ... laghan.htm

Yes, Jerry. His "Memoirs". As you can see, Kissinger sounds very 'reasonable' in these "Memoirs" also. He's glossed over the facts. Let's see, did Britain meet any guarantee commitments in 1964, 1967 or 1974, to come out fighting in Cyprus' defense? Where were the British forces and UNFICYP personnel during the 'action' in 1974?

[Don Kelley]

Are we the only ones who complain about Imperialist Britain, its Empire and its atrocities? This discussion has (so far) centered on the political history of Britain and it's only you who seems to think they were blameless. No one "loves to hate" anyone but no one should be forced to tolerate wrongdoings; by Britain or by bullies like you. And yes you do turn to personal-bashing; full of bitterness (even when you don't know what you are talking about regarding the accusations you make).

Maybe a few months under the Nazis during WWII would have taught you a thing or two; "Come back Great Britain" comes to mind.

As I recall, it was Great Britain who sought to extricate herself from the Treaty of Guarantee which might entail her having to face any Turkish Invasions (breathed a sigh of relief in 1964 ans 1967 that the USA did GB's job in seeing off the threats of Turkish invasions). In fact, the direct orders in 1974 were for all the British Forces including the brave UNFICYP to take cover in the Bases on the understanding that the Turks would leave them alone there.

The trouble with people like you is that you talk military with the same mentality as Saddam Hussein with his silly 'mother of all battles threat'. Technology not manpower wins battles, the Turks use cast off outdated equipment that is well past its sell by date.
How many of you knowalls have been in a Turkish army Barracks recently? Seeing off a bunch fleeing GCs is all they're fit for.
We used to laugh at the GC conscripts in the late 60s in their army surplus store uniforms

[Don Kelley]

Yes, Jerry. His "Memoirs". As you can see, Kissinger sounds very 'reasonable' in these "Memoirs" also. He's glossed over the facts. Let's see, did Britain meet any guarantee commitments in 1964, 1967 or 1974, to come out fighting in Cyprus' defense? Where were the British forces and UNFICYP personnel during the 'action' in 1974?

Where were the Greek EOKA heros in 1974?