Cyprus-Forum.com

[bg_turk]

But on second thought,
I discovered

... are separatists since the support the illegal division.

Using this statement we can account for the logical deficiency above. From this statement it is clear that someone is a seperatist if he supports the illegal division, or more plainly those that support the illegal division are seperatists. Voting for partition is support for illegal division, therefore those who votes for partition are seperatists. This deduction shows that to vote for partition is a sufficient condition to be a seperatist. From your other statement we have already established it is a necessary condition. Hence we have proven that voting for partition is both a necessary and sufficient condition to be a seperatists. Hence, the classes of seperatist S and partition-voters P must be equal, i.e. P=S. So clearly GCs who are in one class must also be in the other, or stated more casually GCs who vote for partition are seperatists.

If you assume there are no GC seperatists, by P=S we obtain that there are no GC who voted for partition. But the Annan Plan established that some GC vote for partition, so by contradiction the assumption must be wrong and we have proven that there are some GC who are seperatists, in fact 24% of them. Will you accept defeat? Or is there still some logical hole in my reasoning?

[Piratis]

Clearly we have failed to appreciate that GCs and the seperatists are disjoint subsets, therefore the GCs who vote for partition can not be seperatists.
Am I right?

Nop.
What you claimed was:

Seperatists do not vote for a plan that would unify them with the country from which they wish to secede.

For which I agreed. Separatists would only vote for partition plans (e.g. Annan plan). Therefore you comment quoted above was totally theoretical since in Cyprus we were not given the chance to vote for a plan that would truly unify our country.
Beyond that your false logic started wasting several posts for nothing

Beyond the "word games", what percentage of TCs do you think they would accept the return to legality? Do you honestly believe that the majority of TCs are not separatists and that this separation is imposed on them? Trying to find excuses as to why TCs are separatists is easier. Trying to claim that the majority of TCs are not separatists is a bit of a joke.

[garbitsch]

Clearly we have failed to appreciate that GCs and the seperatists are disjoint subsets, therefore the GCs who vote for partition can not be seperatists.
Am I right?

Nop.
What you claimed was:

Seperatists do not vote for a plan that would unify them with the country from which they wish to secede.

For which I agreed. Separatists would only vote for partition plans (e.g. Annan plan). Therefore you comment quoted above was totally theoretical since in Cyprus we were not given the chance to vote for a plan that would truly unify our country.
Beyond that your false logic started wasting several posts for nothing

Beyond the "word games", what percentage of TCs do you think they would accept the return to legality? Do you honestly believe that the majority of TCs are not separatists and that this separation is imposed on them? Trying to find excuses as to why TCs are separatists is easier. Trying to claim that the majority of TCs are not separatists is a bit of a joke.

Sorry Piratis, I do not have such intelligence to answer that question. Tell me Piratis, if Annan plan was a partition plan, then whoever votes for it means they have voted for the partition of their country. Am I wrong? And who ever vote for partition, they vote for seperation. They are same. I think your level of intelligence is so high that you should bring it down a bit so that you can realise the inconsistency in your own words, then I will let you insult us.

[bg_turk]

Beyond the "word games", what percentage of TCs do you think they would accept the return to legality?

What I think or what I wish to think is irrevelant since we have no means of directly verifying what the percentage is. We should only argue about existing facts, not about esoterical hypothetical scenarios and try to build logically consistent deductions from the facts and assumptions that we know are true. My logical argument above showed that if we assumed that:
(1) The Annan Plan is a partition plan
(2) only seperatists vote for partition plans
(3) 24% of GC accepted the Annan plan
we may safely conclude using the rules of logic established by your ancestors thousdands of years ago that
(4) 24% GC are seperatists
or in mathematical notation (1), (2), (3) -> (4)
Now do you think (4) is true. And if the conclusion is wrong either the laws of logic are wrong, impossible having in mind how brilliant your ancestor were, or at least one of the assumptions must be wrong. Which assumption of all three is (1), (2) & (3) is wrong?

[Piratis]

Or is there still some logical hole in my reasoning?

Yes. Your logical hole is already discussed:

Voting for partition is support for illegal division

Again you confuse support with acceptance. If I say "Turks are too powerful. We will never get our land back. Lets just forget about north Cyprus and stop wasting our resources for it" is it a support for partition? It is simply an acceptance for partition.

Most of that 24% falls in this category. They decided that there is no hope in a true unification and therefore we should simply accept what is offered so we would at least get some land back(and maybe they had hopes that a true unification could develop later on). Beyond that, if the question is: "Are there any GC traitors?". The answer is "of course". And if it was up to me those traitors would be in the place they deserve.

[bg_turk]

Most of that 24% falls in this category. They decided that there is no hope in a true unification and therefore we should simply accept what is offered so we would at least get some land back(and maybe they had hopes that a true unification could develop later on). Beyond that, if the question is: "Are there any GC traitors?". The answer is "of course". And if it was up to me those traitors would be in the place they deserve.

Ok, finally we have agreed! I would have preferred that you have directly stated that 24% of GC are seperatists, but traitors would suffice as well. Now there are no more logical incosistencies and I may safely agree with you that the Annan Plan was a partition plan. But I am not sure what those 24% of GC will think of you calling them traitors.

[Piratis]

if we assumed that:
(1) The Annan Plan is a partition plan
(2) only separatists vote for partition plans

(1) I agree with this assumption
(2) I disagree with this assumption for the reason stated already.

Many non-separatists (GCs and TCs) voted "yes" to that plan, not because they support separation but simply because they preferred that form of separation from another form of separation and they have lost hope that anything better would come up in the future. Is this really so hard for you to understand?

then I will let you insult us

sorry for the insult. I simply didn't understood the reason of those childish word games and your approach was a bit insulting also.

[bg_turk]

(1) I agree with this assumption
(2) I disagree with this assumption for the reason stated already.

well if you disagree with (2) you must retract a statement of yours since (2), as I have shown above and you would have understood it if you had read my argument more carefully, is implied by this statement of yours:

... are separatists since the support the illegal division.

[Piratis]

Ok, finally we have agreed! I would have preferred that you have directly stated that 24% of GC are separatists, but traitors would suffice as well. Now there are no more logical incosistencies and I may safely agree with you that the Annan Plan was a partition plan. But I am not sure what those 24% of GC will think of you calling them traitors.

First of all I am glad you agreed that the Annan Plan was a partition plan.

Beyond that, it is OK to fall into logical fallacies (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skep ... ments.html) by mistake. It happens to everybody. However doing it intentionally is an insult for the intelligence of the people you expect to accept them. I know you don't except me to accept what you say, so personally am not insulted.

Just to make things clear: I have never said that the 24% of GCs that voted yes are traitors. I clearly said that most of them voted "yes" simply because they accepted that there was no better alternative and that such alternative would not appear in the future.

[bg_turk]

Beyond the "word games", what percentage of TCs do you think they would accept the return to legality? Do you honestly believe that the majority of TCs are not separatists and that this separation is imposed on them? Trying to find excuses as to why TCs are separatists is easier. Trying to claim that the majority of TCs are not separatists is a bit of a joke.

My opinion is that the Anan plan was a unification plan and those TCs that supported it cannot be classified as seperatists, they are unionists.

The seperation is imposed on them by the RoC which does not accept them as equal citizens and currently refuses to return their properties.

Yet, this is only my opinion, and I cannot prove it using the laws of logic since apparently our most fundamental assumptions are diametrically opposed.