Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

@ Paphitis

I noticed you chose to reply selectively.
I translate that as an effort to avoid the issue.
After you reply to ALL points, I would then provide you links.

Sure most things related to EU matters seemed to be coming from the EU as a whole, the question is who within the EU was at the forefront?

Mate, I reject all your claims. I don't reply to all of them in order to save time but consider them ALL rejected. I can do that because you are the one making these claims without any supprtive evidence. It is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence.

Not only rejected, but I find your claims to be utterly stupid.

That said I don't see any point continuing any discussion with you genius.

Well how convenient that is for you.

The onus is on you to provide information. All you have done so far is provide us with your opinions. You did that with the Orams case too which I almost bought if it wasn't for Jerry setting the record straight. The UK did not rule in favour of the Orams at all. It ruled in favour of the Apostolides Family and even called the Orams trespassers on the Apostolides Family property.

If you want to be making outrageous claims, you need to back it up with evidence.

I have as much right to call your opinions as "uterly stupid" until you come up with the goods, something you now refuse to do. Perhaps because there isn't any such evidence.

Which means your opinions are unfounded and hysterical nonsense.

Think about it. To even suggest that British Politicians and the Military Elites have animosity towards Cyprus must also mean we have some grandiose opinions of ourselves. The fact is, Cyprus isn't all that important to them. They got no reason to hate us anymore than anyone else they had a bit of a biffo with and lets face it, Cyprus was nothing compared to all the other stuff they had to endure.

[Jerry]

You can't simply say "the British did this and that and don't care for Cyprus". Some people in British Government have always had it in for Cyprus because of the EOKA campaign but others have a more enlightened view and recognise the fact that Cyprus had a rotten deal in 1960.
My late father's MP, Sir Roger Gale, always supported the Cypriots who have been victims of the Turkish invasion, he recognised the injustices the majority of Cypriots suffered over the years. However my own MP, a very high ranking Tory, told me I was being too political when I suggested that Turkey should be held accountable for its colonisation of the north. Cyprus is very low on the UK Government's list of overseas problems because compared to other conflicts in the region things are quiet on the island and, for the time being, Turkey remains an important strategic ally and trading partner.
As things stand Britain won't take positive action to hinder the establishment of the illegal regime in the north on the other hand it will never recognise the "trnc" either.
Hopefully Erdogan will remain in power for many more years and continue to distance his country from the West. Sooner or later the US will sue for divorce and may abandon Turkey as an ally; there are already suggestions that it may move out of Incirlik. https://www.yenisafak.com/en/news/calls ... on-2795397

[supporttheunderdog]

You can't simply say "the British did this and that and don't care for Cyprus". Some people in British Government have always had it in for Cyprus because of the EOKA campaign but others have a more enlightened view and recognise the fact that Cyprus had a rotten deal in 1960.
My late father's MP, Sir Roger Gale, always supported the Cypriots who have been victims of the Turkish invasion, he recognised the injustices the majority of Cypriots suffered over the years. However my own MP, a very high ranking Tory, told me I was being too political when I suggested that Turkey should be held accountable for its colonisation of the north. Cyprus is very low on the UK Government's list of overseas problems because compared to other conflicts in the region things are quiet on the island and, for the time being, Turkey remains an important strategic ally and trading partner.
As things stand Britain won't take positive action to hinder the establishment of the illegal regime in the north on the other hand it will never recognise the "trnc" either.
Hopefully Erdogan will remain in power for many more years and continue to distance his country from the West. Sooner or later the US will sue for divorce and may abandon Turkey as an ally; there are already suggestions that it may move out of Incirlik. https://www.yenisafak.com/en/news/calls ... on-2795397

Some forget that in 1974 the UK refused to intervene against the coupists (or as Big Mak described it, the Greek Invasion) as requested by Turkey and refused to allow the Turks to use the SBA for their proposed invasion disguised as counter-coup/anti-Greek Invasion operations. Rather, according to an interview given by Sunny Jim, the then Foreign Sec in 74 under H Wislon, to Craig and O'Malley, Britain was looking to blockade Cyprus against the Turkish invasion fleet, but needed US support (including the use of the 6th Fleet) to do it, which the USA was unwilling to do, as Turkey was an important NATO ally, possibly even more important than Greece under Ioannides, though the 6th Fleet was Greece based, and while a dispute between Greece and Turkey could be tolerated and contained, the already fragile unity of Cyprus was simply not important enough to the US to risk a serious dispute between the UK, let alone the USA, on the one hand, and Turkey on the other. This against the back-ground that events in '74 went beyond anything in either '63/64 or '67 in support of Enosis, which lead to previous threats of Turkish Invasion, and where blockading the Turkish fleet with the Coup/Greek Invasion (to use Big Mak's words to the UN) underway would likely have been seen by Turkey as tacit support for the coup/Greek Invasion, and where any form of Enosis involving the whole Island was not acceptable to Turkey.

Unless and until Turkey ceases to be an important NATO ally and e.g. such an important trading partner with the EU, despite Cyprus' membership of the EU , Cyprus is likely to remain second fiddle. Sad fact of life.

[Paphitis]

You can't simply say "the British did this and that and don't care for Cyprus". Some people in British Government have always had it in for Cyprus because of the EOKA campaign but others have a more enlightened view and recognise the fact that Cyprus had a rotten deal in 1960.
My late father's MP, Sir Roger Gale, always supported the Cypriots who have been victims of the Turkish invasion, he recognised the injustices the majority of Cypriots suffered over the years. However my own MP, a very high ranking Tory, told me I was being too political when I suggested that Turkey should be held accountable for its colonisation of the north. Cyprus is very low on the UK Government's list of overseas problems because compared to other conflicts in the region things are quiet on the island and, for the time being, Turkey remains an important strategic ally and trading partner.
As things stand Britain won't take positive action to hinder the establishment of the illegal regime in the north on the other hand it will never recognise the "trnc" either.
Hopefully Erdogan will remain in power for many more years and continue to distance his country from the West. Sooner or later the US will sue for divorce and may abandon Turkey as an ally; there are already suggestions that it may move out of Incirlik. https://www.yenisafak.com/en/news/calls ... on-2795397

Some forget that in 1974 the UK refused to intervene against the coupists (or as Big Mak described it, the Greek Invasion) as requested by Turkey and refused to allow the Turks to use the SBA for their proposed invasion disguised as counter-coup/anti-Greek Invasion operations. Rather, according to an interview given by Sunny Jim, the then Foreign Sec in 74 under H Wislon, to Craig and O'Malley, Britain was looking to blockade Cyprus against the Turkish invasion fleet, but needed US support (including the use of the 6th Fleet) to do it, which the USA was unwilling to do, as Turkey was an important NATO ally, possibly even more important than Greece under Ioannides, though the 6th Fleet was Greece based, and while a dispute between Greece and Turkey could be tolerated and contained, the already fragile unity of Cyprus was simply not important enough to the US to risk a serious dispute between the UK, let alone the USA, on the one hand, and Turkey on the other. This against the back-ground that events in '74 went beyond anything in either '63/64 or '67 in support of Enosis, which lead to previous threats of Turkish Invasion, and where blockading the Turkish fleet with the Coup/Greek Invasion (to use Big Mak's words to the UN) underway would likely have been seen by Turkey as tacit support for the coup/Greek Invasion, and where any form of Enosis involving the whole Island was not acceptable to Turkey.

Unless and until Turkey ceases to be an important NATO ally and e.g. such an important trading partner with the EU, despite Cyprus' membership of the EU , Cyprus is likely to remain second fiddle. Sad fact of life.

Yes all that is correct. Turkey did actually request to use the SBAs and this was rejected.

And the Brits did also threaten to blockade the entire island with its Navy so that the Turks couldn’t get through. That is why Cyprus was surrounded with Royal Navy Ships. They were even watching the Turkish Invasion fleet as it was steaming towards Kyrenia.

It is also the reason why they bought in extra troops into the SBAs.

[Paphitis]

Here is another sad fact. And I am not wanting to be critical.

On the contrary. I can understand why EOKA was created and why they did what they did. I had family in EOKA myself so I can’t be critical or disrespectful to their sacrifice and the sacrifices made by others.

But we jumped the gun. We shouldn’t have done anything in 55. That is the sad thruth.

But it’s easy in hindsight which is the other thing.