Piratis wrote:May I ask why you are informing us of your intention to attack when you feel strong enough?
I am saying the obvious. Our country is under illegal occupation, if we could throw out the invaders of course we would do it. Why this surprises you???
Is it to unite the other side so that they will attack first to make sure that this will never happen?
If they can attack they will anyways. It is clear they are trying to take as much as they can using illegal practices of ethnic cleansing and land grab.
In that case, would that be a fair game?
What would be a fair game would be if everybody accepted legality and a solution based on democracy and human rights as they exist in all other democratic countries.
Since they refuse to be fair we are given no such option unfortunately.
And you are a moderator of this forum. Why are you debating with us if this is what you believe in?
The time I was debating trying to find a solution ended when I realized that the majority (which I am not saying it includes you) of TCs want to gain on our loss by using the power of Turkey.
Today I am convinced that no solution will come out of discussions or negotiations. Unfortunate but true.
If risking the complete annihilation of a population (TCs and GCs together) for whatever goal you have is not extremism, what is extremism then?
Defending your own country from foreign invaders is extremism????
The extremists are those that invaded our country and stole our lands, not us, that want to take back nothing more than what belongs to us.
I am not surprised by your remarks. What I'm saying is that if you are going to strike, you should plan this secretly, because the natural instinct of the other side will be to strike first. Turkey, by occupying the northern part of the island, have fullfilled all her startegic needs as she sees it, so she will not strike again under normal circumstances. However, it will be a different situation if your scenario comes to life. So, this scenario actually is risking another attack and the complete annihaliation of the island for an uncertain gain. Hence, this is an
extreme position to defend, under the circumstances.
Defending your country is a noble cause, but it should be done when you actually can defend your country. Plus, defence is not only by military means. Biggest defence for Cyprus is solving the Cyprus problems as soon as possible, without postponding it until an uncertain time that the circumstances will be more favorable. During the negotiations in 60s and 70s, the TC side had accepted all the 13 points that Makarios had made in 1963. That, for example, would be a good time to make an agreement and close the issue. However, Makarios thought that he would even get a better solution in time. Not closing the problem in 1972, made 1974 possible. Of course this does not make all the suffering that was inflicted on the GCs in 1974 right.
The Turkish side also accepted the Gali set of ideas and the Annan Plan, which were both rejected by the GC side eventually. I'm not blaming you for not accepting something you don't like. This is just to show that there are instances of the Turkish side accepting solution plans! It is not true that there is no hope for an agreement. Occassionally a government in Turkey with the intention of solving the Cyprus problem will come to power (like when Erdogan's AKP first came to power). In that case we should sieze the opportunity, not postpond the problem.
