Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

The Treaty of Guarantee agreement between roc (makarios and kucuk ) + uk + greece and terggy signed for cyprus.

[Kikapu]

The Treaty of Guarantee agreement between roc (makarios and kucuk ) + uk + greece and terggy signed for cyprus.

That was treaty of guarantee agreements for Republic of Cyprus.

Haven't you heard, Lordo, that everything is being re-negotiated of a new Federal Cyprus, therefore, anything and everything agreed on in 1959 will no longer exist once new agreements are in place.

[Lordo]

there are two agreements. one was setting up the republic and the other was protecting it. there is no discussion on the latter. gavole which bloody school did you go to. in the annan plan was there a chapter for the guarantees to be had or removed. if it was as simple as that why has greace suddenly started saying they do not wish to be part of the guarantor pact. is it that easy to break an agreement. you will find terggy will agree to remove the pact if you ask nicely say no more

[Kikapu]

there are two agreements. one was setting up the republic and the other was protecting it. there is no discussion on the latter. gavole which bloody school did you go to. in the annan plan was there a chapter for the guarantees to be had or removed. if it was as simple as that why has greace suddenly started saying they do not wish to be part of the guarantor pact. is it that easy to break an agreement. you will find terggy will agree to remove the pact if you ask nicely say no more

Maybe you haven't heard, but the GCs said OXI to the Annan Plan in 2004 because it included things like the "treaty of guarantee"!

If the "treaty of guarantee" were to follow any new Cyprus, then why was in necessary to be included in the AP? It should have been given that it will be there around Cyprus's neck in perpetuity, no?

[boulio]

The Treaty of Guarantee agreement between roc (makarios and kucuk ) + uk + greece and terggy signed for cyprus.

But Turkey is in violation of those agreements Lordo

[Lordo]

not at all. terggy intervened to protect the tcs. if roc was attacked by say syria, then gcs would have been protected too. the problem is that fact that greace and gcs attacked first the gcs and then tcs. their protection was vital. the agreement was signed by 5 people and it can only be removed by 5 signatures. you are treating international law with childsplay. it is a contract in law and cannot be removed with out the agreement of all five.

if you are having difficulty understanding basic law perhaps a lawyer may be helpful to you. there is more lawyers in sheeprus then terggish soldiers.

[Lordo]

there are two agreements. one was setting up the republic and the other was protecting it. there is no discussion on the latter. gavole which bloody school did you go to. in the annan plan was there a chapter for the guarantees to be had or removed. if it was as simple as that why has greace suddenly started saying they do not wish to be part of the guarantor pact. is it that easy to break an agreement. you will find terggy will agree to remove the pact if you ask nicely say no more

Maybe you haven't heard, but the GCs said OXI to the Annan Plan in 2004 because it included things like the "treaty of guarantee"!

If the "treaty of guarantee" were to follow any new Cyprus, then why was in necessary to be included in the AP? It should have been given that it will be there around Cyprus's neck in perpetuity, no?

tell me which chapter it was in. guarantee was a separate issue which to this date has not been discussed and resources were also left out of the equation to be agreed after the agreement on annan plan.

terggy and greace and the uk together never attended any talks before 2004. how the hell could talat and tasobullagi have agreed on something they have no power over.

[boulio]

not at all. terggy intervened to protect the tcs. if roc was attacked by say syria, then gcs would have been protected too. the problem is that fact that greace and gcs attacked first the gcs and then tcs. their protection was vital. the agreement was signed by 5 people and it can only be removed by 5 signatures. you are treating international law with childsplay. it is a contract in law and cannot be removed with out the agreement of all five.

if you are having difficulty understanding basic law perhaps a lawyer may be helpful to you. there is more lawyers in sheeprus then terggish soldiers.

read the treaty lordo,direct violation.

[Lordo]

look it is simple. if it no longer applied, why has greace all of a sudden started saying that they do not want to be part of it.
since 1974 terggy has been saying lets move from ceasefire to peace agreement and i will pull my troops out. from 1974 to 2015 we have a had a cease fire. so long as there is cease fire only and no peace agreement than there is no violation. if there is a peace agreement signed and terggy does not pull her troops out then there is a direct violation.

enjoy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yU0JuE1jTk

[boulio]

in one post you say its valid and Greece cant unilaterally withdraw and on a other it doesn't apply?