Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

Whether you are a willing or unwilling participant in a game of chess, you cannot stop the game in the middle and start again. The game has progressed to the point it has. Play on. Keep bickering about the move you should have made before we got to this position, and people will not want to play. The cake has been eaten, wash the plates.

Hope you can all follow that?

[Piratis]

sure I can follow. The game is not over, and as in chess, you either have to agree on a draw, which in our case is the "middle ground" of the 1960 agreements, or play until one wins.
I guess you choose the second? No problem. Just remember that it was your choice.

[zan]

How can I forget, you've said it a dozen times. Look foreward to the next threat...

[Bananiot]

Piratis, would you say that returning to the 60's agreements is also the policy of Papadopoulos? And how do you propose we go about returning to those "damned" agreements which first our side tried to nullify, unilaterally?

[Piratis]

Piratis, would you say that returning to the 60's agreements is also the policy of Papadopoulos?

The policy of Papadopoulos is the end of the occupation in a way that will restore the democratic and human rights of all Cypriots.

This can be done with the 2006 or the 2007 or the 2015 agreements, but no agreement will be made if those universally accepted principles are denied to us.

And how do you propose we go about returning to those "damned" agreements which first our side tried to nullify, unilaterally?

How to return: Acceptance of legality by Turkey.

Damned? Definitely far from great. I have already said that those agreements were a big compromise for us. If we liked them they wouldn't be called a "compromise" would they?

This is why we should not be expected to make a compromise on top of the compromise. The compromise is already made in 1960. We will sign nothing worst than that.

[Kifeas]

Piratis, would you say that returning to the 60's agreements is also the policy of Papadopoulos? And how do you propose we go about returning to those "damned" agreements which first our side tried to nullify, unilaterally?

The GC side did not try to nullify anything unilaterally! How?

[cypezokyli]

13 points?

[Kifeas]

13 points?

What 13 points re? And i thought you were a clever guy?
The 13 points were a mere proposal which was communicated both to Turkey and the TCs for consideration. It was not a unilateral decision. Turkey rejected them before even the TCs expressed their opinion on them. Ever since none of those constitutional amendments was carried out and in theory they are still in existence up to this day. If they were a unilateral act by Makarios, why are they still in place? Why you do not learn your history first and then speak?

[cypezokyli]

the fact that turkey rejected them before the tc...is a fact.
besides being a fact, i dont see its importance. if turkey wouldnt reject them first, would the tc accept them?
how clever did someone need to be to realise that the tc wouldnt accept the removal of the veto ?
it was a proposal affecting the core of the agreement signed just 3 years before.
it lead with mathematical accuracy to clashes and the collapse of the agreements
and it was exactly what was needed to strengthen the tc nationalism.

if you dont want to call it unilateral act, then call it one of the biggest stupidit acts of makarios whose concequence we still pay today

[cypezokyli]

Damned? Definitely far from great. I have already said that those agreements were a big compromise for us. If we liked them they wouldn't be called a "compromise" would they?

This is why we should not be expected to make a compromise on top of the compromise. The compromise is already made in 1960. We will sign nothing worst than that.

come on piratis. i thought u supported the majority.
return to the 1960 and accepting no more compromise is only the policy of koutsou and neoi orizontes.