And the Ottoman's lost the administration of the island to the British and later the Ottoman Empire was dissolved and all claim to the island lost. If the Ottoman's want the island back, then let them ask.. no wait they are not around any more.
Sorry are you trying to illegitimize Turkey's right as a gaurentee power to liberate the island and its opressed diaspora? Now that the Greeks have been pushed back, because of their inability to be able to live beside the Turks, the Northern Republic of Cyprus is Turkish land, nothing less, nothing more.
History. You cant come and claim the island based on 300 years of rule by an Empire that does not exist any more.. just idiotic.
Point out where i did that. I was telling you the impacts of British colonialism, i wasnt saying we have an inherited right to Cyprus, but we do now.
I am talking about your original claim that the British did not hand the island back to Turkey and instead instigated independence.
Thats not what i meant. The British agreed to divide up the island but instead made a rash decision which led to the conflict because they where brought to their knees at the hands of the EOKA terrorists.
The Ottoman Empire was one of the most brutal empires ever to exist lol. And they did conquer the island and much more from the Greeks/Byzantine Empire or as I like to call it the Eastern Roman Empire.
Brutal? Please, give me a few examples. Let me help you out, Armenian genocide. You do the rest. If i recall correctly the Ottoman empire was the first to practice religious tolerance, the high ranking officials in the army where Greek. Also, the sooner you can realize the Ottomans where not Turks, then ill give you a point up for history lessons.
How is that not a historical claim? The Ottoman Empire is no more for one. It is like zionist Israelis claiming a god given right to Israel based on some very suspect historical fact dating back 2000+ years. What is next, that Ethiopians start claiming all of the planet since it seems man kind came from the rift valley?
I didnt mean the entire island, i meant the parts Britian was going to initially recede to Turkey.
Hardly. I could give a rats ass about the Greeks in this case. Facts are facts. The Ottoman Empire lost all its claim when it was dissolved. And the new Turkey actually signed away all claims to the island if you did not know. As per your own claim that something won in war is fair game, the British could do whatever they wanted with the island which is what they did. That the majority of the population was Greek and not Turkish (despite 300+ years of Turkish rule... ), it is only natural to turn the island over to the majority population with the provisions of protecting the minority. That was done. That radicals on both side then brought into the conflict the ancient Greece vs Turkey/Ottoman Empire conflict does not mean that the British did anything remotely wrong.
Let me give you a little insight into Cyprus here, you seem to be convieniently forgetting why the Northern side is their in the first place.
When the Greeks took up arms after Makarios and Kucuk established the Republic of Cyprus, a political establishment with a Greek president, Turkish vice president and up to 15 more parliamentary seats for Greeks, the EOKA campaign began attacking Turkish villages and bombing Turkish schools and hospitals. This greately destabilized the island, and TAKSIM was established as an opposition movement to EOKA, which basically perpetrated the exact same atrocities. Now, the Turks where outnumbered by about 250,000 Greeks to 130,000 Turks in terms of population. Since the 60's, the two communities thought a bloody war, with the Greeks attacking British and Turkish villages and the Turks fighting and attacking Greek villages. This led to a brutal war and then eventually, a Greece back militarialistic coup by Nikos Samsun which took full control of the island, closed the Parliament to all Turks and diverted economic resources for EOKA. This, under UN international law, provoked a just and fair respone by Turkey, its duty as described in the gaurentee rights the British and Greece, with Turkey signed, to protect the minorities of each respecting nation, invaded the Northern side and established the Northern Turkish republic. Do you think it would have been a difficult feat for the might of the Turkish army to invade the remainder of the island? Of course not, its not what they wanted. Impatience grew over the years and the Turks came to the conclusion that the only way to ensure the peace of its diaspora was to establish a seperate sovereign state for them.
Not only is the island the most peaceful since it has ever been now the Greeks have been seperated, but the Turks carried out fully and justify their right as signed by both British and Greek leadership, their right as a gaurentee power to the island. Something the British failed to do and is currently being sued for by the Greeks.
And there was no provication at all from the Turkish side? :roll: The Turkish side was all angles and innocent right? There was no ethnic cleansing when the Turkish military invaded .. none at all?
No, it was the Turkish cypriot community which retalliated with TAKSIM and prompted the ethnic cleansing, NOT the Turkish army, it also WASNT the Turkish army that funded TAKSIM unlike EOKA which had Greece backing.
Again, all sides are wrong here, but there are point i must, i must set straight.
How can it be "European Colonialism" when first off the island is in Europe and secondly you agree that the island was "correctly won in war".. or is it only correct when it is the Ottomans that won it in war and not the Brits? I mean, you do realize that the Brits defeated the Ottomans right?
One minute your confusing me. European colonialism isnt subject to non-European countries, i hope you know that. Lastly, Ottoman AND GREEK colonialism is what caused the main troubles, add the Brits to the equation, and you have what you started with: European colonialism.
and was not going to give that as an example. But hey! 
