Cyprus-Forum.com

[donyork]

Cyprus is like one of those marriages which everyone but the couple involved know must end in divorce, and the sooner the better. Whatever the promises Mr Cyprus made at the wedding, it is perfectly clear that he had no intention of keeping them. Within only a few years thereafter he was beating his wife and trying to kick her out of the house. The neighbours were, of course, appalled and called the police but even they couldn’t keep the peace. Mrs Cyprus, fearing for her life, moved into a garden shed but he pursued her even there, until one day when his mistress took over the marital home, Mrs Cyprus’s uncle stepped in and — to no real surprise of the neighbours — marched into the house and gave him a good hiding, throwing out the mistress for good measure. Then, when the uncle forced the husband into giving his wife part of the marital home, and moving in to keep the wife safe from further ill-treatment, Mr Cyprus complained that it was now he was being bullied, protesting to the police that the uncle had behaved unlawfully. The police, however, refused to take any action against the uncle, and instead have confined themselves yet again to keeping the two apart.

The husband still insists that he wants to stay married and that if only the uncle would push off he and his battered and long-suffering wife could live happily ever after. The neighbours have tried their besr, largely for peace and quiet all round, to pretend that he has learned the errors of his ways, but privately few think the idea is likely ever to work. Mr Cyprus is just simply not the kind of husband his abused wife could ever trust — and who could fault her for that? Even though, despite the evidence against him, he keeps on telling the neighbours that they were fine until the uncle came along, he still tries to keep the poor woman shut away, treating her as if she was to blame for everything that had gone wrong, He still abuses her in public, sneering to everyone he meets that she asks for too much, and only does what her uncle tells her to do.

Forty years on it Mr Cyprus is still making this poor woman’s life a misery, with every prospect that back under the same roof the husband will take that as licence to do as he did before. That being so, is it not time that she went off and made a new life for herself? Divorce? Frankly, it would be a kindness not just to the wife but the neighbours.

[shahmaran]

excellent!!

[Piratis]

Bullcrap.

There was never a "marriage". In Cyprus we have a Greek Cypriot majority and a Turkish Cypriot minority. Can you imagine the Blacks of the USA asking for a "divorce" and taking 1/3rd of the states exclusively for themselves?

If there is one thing I will say about your crappy metaphor is this: We never asked for the Turks to "marry" us. Why did they came to our island in the first place? If there is a metaphor for the reason they came, that was to rape and exploit us, not to marry us. They are welcome to stay as equal RoC and EU citizens and respect our legal, human and democratic rights in the same way we respect theirs, but if they don't want that then nobody can keep them on our island and they are free to go in the way they came.

Cypriots have suffered for centuries and continue to suffer from the expansionistic Turks that have always wanted our island for themselves. Trying to portrait the Turks as the victims in the case of Cyprus is a joke.

Here is what I have to say about this, not with Mr, Ms, uncles and other crap but with real facts:

First of all I have to make something very clear:

I believe that we should leave the past behind, we should forgive each other, stop all illegalities and move ahead with a united democratic country without racist discriminations and with respect to the human rights of all Cypriots.

Unfortunately I notice that there some people that insist on using a tiny and selective part of the past as an excuse for the continuation of illegalities and their demand for a "solution" that will be based on racist discrimination of people based on their ethnic background (which is something that exists in no democratic country in the world)

To those people Greek Cypriots deserved the violations of their human rights for the last 32 years and they deserve to be convicted for eternal violation of their human rights in a country that discriminates against them because of their race.

The fact is however that Turks in Cyprus have committed 100 times more crimes against Greek Cypriots than the other way around.

Greek Cypriots have been the majority on the island of Cyprus for 3000+ years. Their interaction with Turks starts in the 15th century, were the Turks attacked our island. This also answers the question "Who started it" for anybody that thinks that this is important:

Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked at will. In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpas Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.

In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. About 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Mustafa Pasha landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell--September 9, 1570--20,000 Nicosians were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

So now it is clear how the interaction of Turks with Greek Cypriots started in Cyprus, and the question "Who started it" is answered as well.

What followed were 300 years of Ottoman rule in Cyprus. During these 3 centuries Greek Cypriots were oppressed second category citizens. They had to pay multiple times the taxes of muslims and their testimony in courts was not accepted. Whenever they tried to revolt against their oppressors they were slaughtered.

So here we have a period were Turks were oppressing and killing Greeks in Cyprus. The result of this period was 300 years of oppression against GCs and 10s of thousands of Greek Cypriots dead.

The next "round" of conflict between the two communities was at the end of the British rule in Cyprus, and then from 63 to 68. During this period extremists from both sides were committing crimes and atrocities.

This is the only period that TCs remember, but even here they remember only their own casualties and not the crimes that they had committed against GCs.

So this is a period were both sides had about an equal number of casualties, some 100s for each side.

Then in 1974 the illegal coupists overthrow our president and Turkey found the excuse to invade Cyprus. No TC was killed by the coupists before the invasion had started, but only after.
The result of the coup/invasion was 6000 GCs dead and 200.000 GCs ethnically cleansed. On the other side the TCs had only a couple of 100s of victims.

The next period is the 32 years of illegal occupation and insistence from Turkey to violate international law and human rights. This continues until today.

Conclusion:
1) The Turks "started it" in the 15th century
2) The Turks have committed much much more crimes against Greek Cypriots.
3) The Turks insist on their crimes today
4) Greek Cypriots have committed crimes as well, but only a tiny fraction of the crimes that the Turks have committed.

Still, Greek Cypriots are more than willing to put all these behind as long as we are not provoked by people that remember only the 1% of history that suits that in order to prove that Greek Cypriots are the evil people that deserve even more crimes against them.

Therefore I ask from people on this forum to either:

1) Leave the past behind. Do not try to excuse crimes and illegalities in 2006 with events that happened in the past. Concentrate on how we can find a solution that will respect all Cypriots equally without racist discriminations and human right violations.

Or, if doing (1) is impossible for you then at least:

2) If you believe that the past should be used to determine who is the "good" and who is the "bad" one and that this should be the basis of solving the Cyprus problem (instead of democracy, human rights and legality, that I propose) then at least use the whole history and not the tiny bits that suit you.

[Piratis]

and about your title "Time for a divorce". for the Turks it has always been time for a "divorce", isn't it? Wasn't always their aim to take (at least) part of our island? So this time is no different than any other time. So keep dreaming about that time. It will never come as what you are trying to do is criminal and illegal.

[shahmaran]

im sorry but i cant say i wasnt expecting Piratis to dropkick into this post in the middle of the night, only to "bust open" some 3500 year old kick-ass moves on your assses and teach all of us some ancestorial lessons and the deeper reasons for the GC/TC conflict....

so tell me something Piratis, have the Greeks actually grown on trees in Cyprus and became "natives", did god suddenly drop you from the sky and you landed on this island?

or is the root of your mentality nothing but "finders keepers"?

Because the Greeks dont fit in neither of these situations, so where is the root of your incredibly preposterous and laughable idea of nationalism?

I believe i have asked you this before and you never replied, so can we also say that the Persians should have a say on this island as well?

my favourite part is your little conclusion:

1) The Turks "started it" in the 15th century
2) The Turks have committed much much more crimes against Greek Cypriots.
3) The Turks insist on their crimes today
4) Greek Cypriots have committed crimes as well, but only a tiny fraction of the crimes that the Turks have committed.

Still, Greek Cypriots are more than willing to put all these behind as long as we are not provoked by people that remember only the 1% of history that suits that in order to prove that Greek Cypriots are the evil people that deserve even more crimes against them.


well thank you sir, for you kindness and forgiveness and you have such a big heart, you are willing to forgive us regardless of "us starting this fight " almost 1000 years ago, you are ever so understanding, i shall crumble before your greatness and hide my head in shame for ever and carry this burden with me untill the day i day, thank you ever so much for letting me live on your island....

[THE HIGHLANDER]

I was'nt born in Cyprus.........i was born in Scotland, so i am not a Cypriot..........oh but wait a minute,i have now landed on Cyprus soil,like many of my fellow Brittish countryman did as early as the 14th century,so if what i keep reading on this form is correct i am now a Scottish Cypriot and have as much right to be here as a Greek or Turkish Cypriot.......Greece and Turkey may be nearer Cyprus than Scotland,England,Germany,France,Spain etc is but who gave these two countrys any God given right to lay claim that any part of Cyprus was there's ?............as i've said time and time again The Republic of Cyprus is an independant country and if you were lucky enough to be born here you are 100% Cypriot regardless of where your parents and family originated from its as simple as that !!!!!!!!

[ken910]

hey everyone watch out for the wrath of the protectors. now pitso and is freinds will go around sharing their great wisdom WITH ALL NONE BELIEVERS. now stand by we will get the greek version IS.LIES AND MORE LIES AND MORE LIES TRUST US WE WILL NO LONGER SLAUGHTER YOU WE HAVE CHANGED

[Alexis]

Sure, let's have a divorce, question is how? Try asking yourselves why there is a Cyprus problem and seeing the problem from the other person's point of view. Whilst each side thinks it is the righteous one this thing will never be resolved. I'm a Greek Cypriot and I won't bore you with my version of events, I know what happened to two of my relatives in 1964 (yes guys, that's not a typo, 1964 not 1974). So my point being as long as either side cannot see the other's point of view, divorce will be just as difficult to decide as a continuation of the marriage.

[Viewpoint]

Sure, let's have a divorce, question is how? Try asking yourselves why there is a Cyprus problem and seeing the problem from the other person's point of view. Whilst each side thinks it is the righteous one this thing will never be resolved. I'm a Greek Cypriot and I won't bore you with my version of events, I know what happened to two of my relatives in 1964 (yes guys, that's not a typo, 1964 not 1974). So my point being as long as either side cannot see the other's point of view, divorce will be just as difficult to decide as a continuation of the marriage.

But Alexis you must see that having lived apart for 33 years legalizing it would be much easier than forcing us back together into a marriage neither side really wants.

[Alexis]

But Alexis you must see that having lived apart for 33 years legalizing it would be much easier than forcing us back together into a marriage neither side really wants.

hi vp,

From your point of view, simply legalising the status quo looks fine - and as Turkey said back in the 70s, Cyprus Problem was solved in 1974 anyway so what's the problem? From the GC point of view this is not so obvious. Letting go of northern Cyprus is neither easy nor, I have to say fair for the GC community. I have already explained (in previous posts)why I think agreeing a divorce would be just as hard as agreeing union. The key word here is 'agreeing' , whilst you may like to liken Cyprus to a marriage, it is not and never was, we were stuck with each other from the start whether we liked each other or not, this island belongs to both of us. So the problem becomes agreeing to a divorce which both communities have to do to solve the Cyprus Problem. Bear in mind also that the international community sees it this way too. The current status quo has now been condemned by all parties (including Papadopulos and Talat as well as Ankara and Athens), so the point is if we do go down the partitionist road it will not be as simple as just legalising the current status quo, we will have to agree to it and as I've asked before is it really easier to agree to partition than agree to union?[/i]