Cyprus-Forum.com

[Natty]

Why do you not agree? Of course it's your right to, I suppose all I can say is that I disagree with you......doesn't really help though does it lol..... EOKA was not set up to ethnically cleanse the Turkish Cypriots, it was to fight the British and yes as I said to gain Ennosis, I know that Makarios understood that Ennosis was no longer able to happen....Again I don't know that much about EOKA B, but i do know that the greek cypriots who supported this organisation was probably less that 2% probabaly even less, it was mainly an organisation being controlled by the junta, like the national gaurd, which became overcome with greek (junta, mainland greek) officers....

[cypezokyli]

Why do you not agree? Of course it's your right to, I suppose all I can say is that I disagree with you......doesn't really help though does it lol..... EOKA was not set up to ethnically cleanse the Turkish Cypriots, it was to fight the British and yes as I said to gain Ennosis, I know that Makarios understood that Ennosis was no longer able to happen....Again I don't know that much about EOKA B, but i do know that the greek cypriots who supported this organisation was probably less that 2% probabaly even less, it was mainly an organisation being controlled by the junta, like the national gaurd, which became overcome with greek (junta, mainland greek) officers....

ofcource EOKA didnot have an explicit aim to ethnically cleanse tcs. i didnot say that. but nevertheless it killed a number of tcs. it also explicitly excluded all communists and all tcs from the struggle. which is a big chunk of the population.
its simple , EOKA had one aim- union with greece.

now, i can perfectly understand why the gcs wanted enosis back then. but the same way i understand the concerns of the tcs concerning such a development (especially after what happenned in crete )

Makarios understood that enosis is not possible only after a number of things happenned. some people argued that he already changed his mind in 1963 , some argue that that happenned in 1967 (to a certain extent i go for the second) . its clear in the speeches he used to give. it took him quite a lot to realise that, wouldnt you say ?

its true that eoka b , was supported by 2% (or even less) of the gcs. the question that arises, is where was the other 98% after the coup took place?

[Natty]

Hey, i suppose we're going to have to agree to disagree on some things.....hehe. I agree that tc's were killed by EOKA, but as far as I know (and of course I could be wrong) they were members of the police force set up by the British to combat the EOKA members....TC and GC civilians were killed in explosion s though aimed at british bases, i beleive....(again I don't know for sure). Even though the aim was ennosis, it was also independence from the British, I suppose the two came hand in hand....some GC'S didn't want enosis yet they still supported EOKA....It's a complicated though isn't it?? Way too complicated......

its true that eoka b , was supported by 2% (or even less) of the gcs. the question that arises, is where was the other 98% after the coup took place?

I didn't quite understand what you mean't by that last statement.....sorry it's a bit late where I am....LOL
(",)

[cypezokyli]

@ andry
http://www.phileleftheros.com/main/main.asp?gid=395

even though i completely disagree with the article , she proves what i was saying : the times between 55-74 are a tabboo in cyprus

[andri_cy]

OK Because you kind of said this was for me...
I dont think those years were totally taboo. I think they are now turning into taboo. I dont think taking those years and "erasing" them is the way to go. The TC is going to want to unify with us because we are doing that? I think not. I think that the right thing to do, would be to let those years in, but write the history of them right. All the bad things everyone did. I think as a people we will lose our identity totally if we start erasing parts of our history here and there that we dont want to face.

[cypezokyli]

thats a tough dillemma though.
erasing or continuing with our one-sided aspect of history ?

ofcource the best choise is the third way, but i honestly doubt if we are able to do that

[andri_cy]

I never said to continue with one-sided aspect of history. I said to make it so both sides are listed. Erasing the whole period is a BIG mistake. We need to man up to the mistakes we made and the other side the same. Nothing is going to get fixed by pretending those years didnt happen.

[cypezokyli]

we tottally agree