Talk:Green Line (Cyprus)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Green Line (Cyprus) redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Comments edit
You can create the template for WPTRNC and put it here. DenizTC 08:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Neutrality edit
IMO this sounds quite biased for the Greek side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.227.213 (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I would even say very biased! The quotation marks and terms like "euphemistically" are completely redundant. Maarten 11 11:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
"euphemistically" edit
I don't think the use of the word "euphemistically" means that the article is not neutral. The 1974 invasion is called a "peace operation" by Turkey, that is a euphemism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pl4293 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
It's biased. Turkey was one of the three powers (the others were Greece and UK) that under the treaty of 1960 guaranteed the independence of Cyprus; the Greek-sponsored coup d'etat was a legal case for intervention. If this meant a military one or not is very much disputed, but there was an obligation to intervene. (Not to stay, however, but that's another issue). And in the light of the massacres committed by Greek cypriots, I wouldn't put "peace operation" in quotation marks but rather put something as "what Turey declared to be a peace operation" or something like that.--Ilyacadiz (talk) 11:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, the Operation Attila itself may have been a legal protocol of the 1960 Constitution; it may have even been to bring peace to the island. That doesn't mean that the continued occupation is justified for those reasons. I wonder, should the Turkish army leave tonight, would TCs suddenly get massacred by GCs? Obviously I'm not suggesting that this is the sole reason the Turkish army continue to occupy Cyprus; I'm just saying that actually, whilst the 1960 Constitution provided this protocol to intervene, it also states it is for the purpose of guaranteeing the sovereign integrity of the Republic of Cyprus, which clearly means they are then obliged to leave as soon as it looks like TCs are safe; hasn't happened. Eugene-elgato (talk) 18:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)