Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

a Cypriot utopia comprised of Christians and Muslims with criminal and abusive Turkey as the umpire!

Not a utopia, but that above would be a reasonable description of how people lived in Cyprus for 100's of years with out any kind of 'hard partition' of Cyprus, the kind of which we have lived with for a far far shorter period of time, to date. I personally do not think it is beyond our potential to find a way we can live in a united Cyprus as Christian and Muslim and anything else with only ourselves as umpire. Beyond our abilities maybe but not potential in my view and thus worth some effort to explore.

[Sotos]

His so called "concessions" are nothing less than capitulation aiming at either forcing the GCs to vote "No" once again, or in the unlikely event they would vote "yes" to get a state that would split within 6 months.

If we vote "yes" to such "solution" the state would not split up within 6 months. Why would Turkey agree to give up half of Cyprus after we would have agreed to make the whole island its protectorate? For Turkey partition is its plan B. Plan A is the control and the eventual Turkification of the whole island.

[Get Real!]

a Cypriot utopia comprised of Christians and Muslims with criminal and abusive Turkey as the umpire!

I personally do not think it is beyond our potential to find a way we can live in a united Cyprus as Christian and Muslim and anything else with only ourselves as umpire.

That can only be doable/workable with a modern and civilized government like the RoC at the helm, not Ottomans.

[erolz66]

that the GCs are willing to trash their own in favour of the Turks, but you won't see your Turk buddies doing it theirs.

I do not think you will 'today' find much of such, here in this place, though you can find such here in the past, if you are willing and able to see. If you want to believe it or not, accept it or not, I believe that there are TC voices that are seen by the wider TC community in the same way you appear to regard Pyrpolizer and get criticised by 'their own' in the same way.

As an off topic aside, I do want to say, for what ever it is worth B25, that for all the many polarised differences there are between us, I would say I have never found myself doubting the sincerity of what you post. Never had to consider if you are posting for the objective of 'winding people up' as a form of personal entertainment or not. I also you mention that if I consider my personal 'top ten' of most memorable posts in my many years in (and out) of this forum, one of your is right up there and quite possible 'number one'.

[Pyrpolizer]

His so called "concessions" are nothing less than capitulation aiming at either forcing the GCs to vote "No" once again, or in the unlikely event they would vote "yes" to get a state that would split within 6 months.

If we vote "yes" to such "solution" the state would not split up within 6 months. Why would Turkey agree to give up half of Cyprus after we would have agreed to make the whole island its protectorate? For Turkey partition is its plan B. Plan A is the control and the eventual Turkification of the whole island.

With his concessions so far we are at Plan B. i doubt anyone would vote yes if he eventually concedes on the guarantees so we will still be on plan B.

[B25]

that the GCs are willing to trash their own in favour of the Turks, but you won't see your Turk buddies doing it theirs.

I do not think you will 'today' find much of such, here in this place, though you can find such here in the past, if you are willing and able to see. If you want to believe it or not, accept it or not, I believe that there are TC voices that are seen by the wider TC community in the same way you appear to regard Pyrpolizer and get criticised by 'their own' in the same way.

As an off topic aside, I do want to say, for what ever it is worth B25, that for all the many polarised differences there are between us, I would say I have never found myself doubting the sincerity of what you post. Never had to consider if you are posting for the objective of 'winding people up' as a form of personal entertainment or not. I also you mention that if I consider my personal 'top ten' of most memorable posts in my many years in (and out) of this forum, one of your is right up there and quite possible 'number one'.

I am honoured!

[erolz66]

That can only be doable/workable with a modern and civilized government like the RoC at the helm, not Ottomans.

Hard for me to understand what you actually mean by this. If by a "a modern and civilized government like the RoC" you mean like the current RoC government made up entirely* of 'christian cypriots' and with the determination of 'modern and civilized' being dependant on such 'christian' criteria, then for obvious reasons I would have 'issues' with your statement. Similarly it is hard for to understand what you actually mean by 'not Ottomans', especially given how you have used such a label historically. If by 'ottoman' you mean anyone that you choose to arbitrarily define as, like say myself to give one example or TC generically, then clearly I would have issues. I would suggest rather than 'not Ottoman' we could perhaps consider a term like 'not those who are not of Cyprus' ? Not an ideal term either but for me at least a lot easier to accept than 'not ottoman'.

*what is the 'make up' of the current RoC government anyway ? How many MPs are 'christian' or 'not christian' ? Orthodox Christian ? Greek Orthodox Christian ?

[Get Real!]

That can only be doable/workable with a modern and civilized government like the RoC at the helm, not Ottomans.

Hard for me to understand what you actually mean by this. If by a "a modern and civilized government like the RoC" you mean like the current RoC government made up entirely* of 'christian cypriots' and with the determination of 'modern and civilized' being dependant on such 'christian' criteria, then for obvious reasons I would have 'issues' with your statement. Similarly it is hard for to understand what you actually mean by 'not Ottomans', especially given how you have used such a label historically. If by 'ottoman' you mean anyone that you choose to arbitrarily define as, like say myself to give one example or TC generically, then clearly I would have issues. I would suggest rather than 'not Ottoman' we could perhaps consider a term like 'not those who are not of Cyprus' ? Not an ideal term either but for me at least a lot easier to accept than 'not ottoman'.

*what is the 'make up' of the current RoC government anyway ? How many MPs are 'christian' or 'not christian' ? Orthodox Christian ? Greek Orthodox Christian ?

The composition of the government should be determined by democratic procedures and not an “ethnic allocation” leading to divisions and strife.

Ethnicity must take a backseat (made irrelevant even) for a modern unitary state to work.

[erolz66]

The composition of the government should be determined by democratic procedures and not an “ethnic allocation” leading to divisions and strife.Ethnicity must take a backseat (made irrelevant even) for a modern unitary state to work.

Expressed like that (vs the original expression) I personally have no issue with that as a principal. Especially with the inclusion of a 'not' part being defined as 'those not of / in Cyprus'. Some concerns 'around the edges' maybe about the 'practice' but in principle, ok with me. Can you see how the original expression could easily be seen as you meaning 'as long as ruled by christians / Greeks / GC and not muslims / turks / TC' ?

I also suspect we have differences about possible ways we get to there from where we are now, with me being willing to accept a necessity of 'intermediate' stages and you being more 'straight there or nothing'.

[Get Real!]

I also suspect we have differences about possible ways we get to there from where we are now, with me being willing to accept a necessity of 'intermediate' stages and you being more 'straight there or nothing'.

I think you’ll find that any “intermediate stages” would tend to stick longer than desired and we may find ourselves stuck there for good and once again in strife.