Cyprus-Forum.com

[MR-from-NG]

It would have made more sense to kick all your asses back to Greece so that us TC's could live in our country in peace, without the fear of being ethnically cleansed by barbaric Greeks.

In the meantime, you can stay where you are and be ethnically cleansed by your Mongol Anatolian cousins.

OK Einstein, what is our alternative? Keep it simple please.

[kimon07]

GIG, coming back to the topic, after the irrelevant interruption from that TMT thug who calls himself "Mr" I would say that your quotes about how the British were and are interpreting the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee, are nothing but cheap excuses and alibis for Britain to allow and support the turkish invasion and not stand up to its obligations under the treaty. And lets not forget the facts revealed in this forum by you, Bill Cobbet, me and others, that Britain participated to the preparations for the invasion and the partition and to the instigation by the TMT of the intercommunal conflict as well as to the international spreading of the kind of propaganda which that MR guy and his likes are promoting.

[bill cobbett]

How about morally? Should Turkey have just stood by while the TC's were exterminated?

Oh boy. here we go again. Remember I warned you all they would come back on the same myth with a new alias? Eh Bill?

Loog Mr. Better visit the thread below, first, look intyo the links and then come back again. Will you please? Thanks.
cyprus37669-50.html

Well morals are important but the ToG wasn't/isn't about morals. We can only talk about for what it is, as a Treaty that guaranteed the CY Constitution and let's please remember that doesn't mean jumping to an immediate military response to restore the state of affairs.

So there's nothing in the ToG about protecting one tribe at the expense of the other but let's bring it back to a moral question which asks whether it is morally right to take a military action to protect one "tribe" which risks and as we know from reality costs the lives of thousands in the other "tribe"?

Surely the answer to that question is... that it can't be right...?

... and to bring the moral question up to date, many of us might like to see an intervention in Syria, a moral intervention undertaken for the highest of noble reasons, but that again would lead to a great loss of life, most as ever innocent civilians, even though our moral justification would be the usual nice one of intervening to protect lives and those who support such an intervention in Syria would be keen to have their moral judgements backed by the cover of quasi-legal respectability given by an enabling UN Resolution, as per Libya, as per Kuwait, as per Iraq, as per etc etc.

Finally, any moral or ethical discussion on intervention, or War to give it its impolite name, wouldn't be complete without ref to our understanding of when war is justified, the concept of a Just War. Here's a pretty decent and brief summary from the BBC site...

What is a Just War?

Six conditions must be satisfied for a war to be considered just:

The war must be for a just cause.
The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
The intention behind the war must be good.
All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried first.
There must be a reasonable chance of success.
The means used must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve.

How should a Just War be fought?

A war that starts as a Just War may stop being a Just War if the means used to wage it are inappropriate.

Innocent people and non-combatants should not be harmed.
Only appropriate force should be used.
This applies to both the sort of force, and how much force is used.
Internationally agreed conventions regulating war must be obeyed.

[kimon07]

It would have made more sense to kick all your asses back to Greece so that us TC's could live in our country in peace, without the fear of being ethnically cleansed by barbaric Greeks.

In the meantime, you can stay where you are and be ethnically cleansed by your Mongol Anatolian cousins.

OK Einstein, what is our alternative? Keep it simple please.

Well, if you are good at kicking arses you can start by kicking your Mongol oppressors out and thus becoming free Europeans once again.

[Panicos UK]

How about morally? Should Turkey have just stood by while the TC's were exterminated?

Oh boy. here we go again. Remember I warned you all they would come back on the same myth with a new alias? Eh Bill?

Loog Mr. Better visit the thread below, first, look intyo the links and then come back again. Will you please? Thanks.
cyprus37669-50.html

Well morals are important but the ToG wasn't/isn't about morals. We can only talk about for what it is, as a Treaty that guaranteed the CY Constitution and let's please remember that doesn't mean jumping to an immediate military response to restore the state of affairs.

So there's nothing in the ToG about protecting one tribe at the expense of the other but let's bring it back to a moral question which asks whether it is morally right to take a military action to protect one "tribe" which risks and as we know from reality costs the lives of thousands in the other "tribe"?

Surely the answer to that question is... that it can't be right...?

... and to bring the moral question up to date, many of us might like to see an intervention in Syria, a moral intervention undertaken for the highest of noble reasons, but that again would lead to a great loss of life, most as ever innocent civilians, even though our moral justification would be the usual nice one of intervening to protect lives and those who support such an intervention in Syria would be keen to have their moral judgements backed by the cover of quasi-legal respectability given by an enabling UN Resolution, as per Libya, as per Kuwait, as per Iraq, as per etc etc.

Finally, any moral or ethical discussion on intervention, or War to give it its impolite name, wouldn't be complete without ref to our understanding of when war is justified, the concept of a Just War. Here's a pretty decent and brief summary from the BBC site...

What is a Just War?

Six conditions must be satisfied for a war to be considered just:

The war must be for a just cause.
The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
The intention behind the war must be good.
All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried first.
There must be a reasonable chance of success.
The means used must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve.

How should a Just War be fought?

A war that starts as a Just War may stop being a Just War if the means used to wage it are inappropriate.

Innocent people and non-combatants should not be harmed.
Only appropriate force should be used.
This applies to both the sort of force, and how much force is used.
Internationally agreed conventions regulating war must be obeyed.

Great post Bill. There are so many words and phrases open to interpretation in this 'Just War' description however. Phrases like 'appropriate force', the 'intention must be good' make me cringe because if a larger power wants to, it will find a way to go to war regardless of whether or not these criteria are met. Take the Treaty of Guarantee. Turkey didn't need it, but was able to claim (because it existed) that there was a legal pretext for the invasion.

[kimon07]

How about morally? Should Turkey have just stood by while the TC's were exterminated?

Well morals are important but the ToG wasn't/isn't about morals. We can only talk about for what it is, as a Treaty that guaranteed the CY Constitution and let's please remember that doesn't mean jumping to an immediate military response to restore the state of affairs.
..........
What is a Just War?

Six conditions must be satisfied for a war to be considered just:

The war must be for a just cause.
The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
The intention behind the war must be good.
All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried first.
There must be a reasonable chance of success.
The means used must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve.

How should a Just War be fought?

A war that starts as a Just War may stop being a Just War if the means used to wage it are inappropriate.

Great post Bill. There are so many words and phrases open to interpretation in this 'Just War' description however. Phrases like 'appropriate force', the 'intention must be good' make me cringe because if a larger power wants to, it will find a way to go to war regardless of whether or not these criteria are met. Take the Treaty of Guarantee. Turkey didn't need it, but was able to claim (because it existed) that there was a legal pretext for the invasion.[/quote]

Yes, good post and it raises some fine questions on our subject which is the turkish invasion.

Is the war just, when it is "premeditated" and when its cause is other than the one claimed, i.e., conquest of the island and not the restoration of the state of affairs on it?
Even if the cause was sincere, shouldn't it stop as soon as the cause was accomplished? Was the continuation of it and the expansion of the conquest moral?

Will the invasion which Turkey has been planing since many years back in Iraqi Kurdistan (Kirkuk and Mosul) with the pretence of protecting the Turkmen from extinction be just and moral if it occurs?

[Lordo]

It would have made more sense to kick all your asses back to Greece so that us TC's could live in our country in peace, without the fear of being ethnically cleansed by barbaric Greeks.

In the meantime, you can stay where you are and be ethnically cleansed by your Mongol Anatolian cousins.

OK Einstein, what is our alternative? Keep it simple please.

Well, if you are good at kicking arses you can start by kicking your Mongol oppressors out and thus becoming free Europeans once again.

You had a chance to kick their asses in 74 the trouble is your kind could nut run away fast enough. You got guts to fight mehmetcik show it. You have plenty of chance they are shooting distance away.

As to becoming a free europeans, you mean like your Kalamara friends, you can keep it. No thanks.

[GreekIslandGirl]

GIG, coming back to the topic, after the irrelevant interruption from that TMT thug who calls himself "Mr" I would say that your quotes about how the British were and are interpreting the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee, are nothing but cheap excuses and alibis for Britain to allow and support the turkish invasion and not stand up to its obligations under the treaty. And lets not forget the facts revealed in this forum by you, Bill Cobbet, me and others, that Britain participated to the preparations for the invasion and the partition and to the instigation by the TMT of the intercommunal conflict as well as to the international spreading of the kind of propaganda which that MR guy and his likes are promoting.

Indeed their only concern in endless debates after the treaties were drawn up was how to secure their gains without supplying anything in exchange to Cyprus. For example, their worry that their hold on the SBAs may be in jeopardy (since the Treaty was condemned by the RoC government in 1964) ...

"The abandonment of our position on the Treaty of Guarantee would undermine our position on the rest of the 1960 settlement ... anything which called the 1960 settlement as a whole into question could expose us to pressure on our moral (as distinct from legal) right to hang onto the areas."

Steele (Legal Advisors, FCO) to Fearn, 10th February 1971; FC09/1374, file WSC 3/548/5

[repulsewarrior]

But, we resisted, we put up a fight in 1974. We should have welcome the Turkish army as our saviour, with roses. Instead, unable to cope with the army of the Turks we turned against unarmed villagers at Aloa, Sandalaris and elsewhere, killing kids and old folk. I wish life was just as simple as some make it out to be.

...and in those graves there are Christians too, few among many true, but the explanation is far more complex indeed. no one can deny, these deaths were horrible, brutal, and more murder rather than casualty of war, we see this Ignorance amongst us still, bags of titties for the mother. i remember Solomou.

...don't paint me a "Greek" Mr. B, my many family members disappeared, because they were Cypriots close to their land, even if they were Greek speaking.

i don't know about you, but i welcomed them, the Turkish Army with open arms, then. was there a reason to believe that there would be an invasion (and the UN?)? Britain strangely too i remember having failed as a Guarantor, where i thought there was a Family of Man stronger and a Commonwealth she did not lead, neither did Turkey. and now that "we turned against unarmed villagers at Aloa, Sandalaris and elsewhere, killing kids and old folk", i ask you who? Bananiot, you of all people so badly intended, you snatch away at my Humanity with this easy tripe, it's ridiculous and sad, it's a shame. I honestly hope you will get out of the funk you are in, yes there are Greeks who are "Greeks", "Turks" are no better, and both of them are among the worst, yet they preoccupy our lives with their differences; i am confused, are you a "Turk", are you ignorant of Greeks but anti-"Greek": are you a Citizen of the World?

...in affect, to Turkey we are property. the British at least provided Cyprus an excellent Rule of Law although her motives remain unclear. aren't we lucky we need no help from Greece? and to the rest of our global partners there is the Problem.

frankly, i'll say it again, read and comment on my manifesto thingy.

...define Bicommunal and Bizonal where the displaced from '63 and '74 come first, better; i challenge vp and you directly, because i know you are both able.

...define a form of Government where in a Unitary State, all Citizens are equal, and as Persons they are equals each in their National Assembly where they sustain Distinct Identities on Territorial Jurisdictions (Bizonal) through self representation effecting their daily lives; call it BBF, if you will.

i appreciate your bitterness, as well your shame, i feel it. i choose to remember; Lest We Forget: i hope you'll join me and choose to act accordingly.

[kimon07]

It would have made more sense to kick all your asses back to Greece so that us TC's could live in our country in peace, without the fear of being ethnically cleansed by barbaric Greeks.

In the meantime, you can stay where you are and be ethnically cleansed by your Mongol Anatolian cousins.

OK Einstein, what is our alternative? Keep it simple please.

Well, if you are good at kicking arses you can start by kicking your Mongol oppressors out and thus becoming free Europeans once again.

You had a chance to kick their asses in 74 the trouble is your kind could nut run away fast enough. You got guts to fight mehmetcik show it. You have plenty of chance they are shooting distance away.

As to becoming a free europeans, you mean like your Kalamara friends, you can keep it. No thanks.

Well, yes, we were defeated in 1974, as we were betrayed and outnumbered and out gunned and with no air or navy support and split in two due to the coup etc. But we are still free and prosperous and sovereign and recognized and an EU and UN member and soon to become a major energy player in the East. med. While you, after having been enclaved by the TMT in 1964-64, you became enslaved in 1974. By your "brothers" whom the TMT invited in to "rescue you' from an imaginary "slaughter". And you are now enclaved and enslaved and isolated. And its entirely in our hands to get out from this situation by requesting the International Community to help you get rid of your oppressors. Unless you prefer and enjoy to stay under the boot of the Mongol, in which case you should stop crying and complaining about your "isolation".