After fall of Stalingrad, and the Romanian war again Germany

Discussions on all aspects of the smaller Axis nations in Europe and Asia. Hosted by G. Trifkovic.
User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Victor » 10 Sep 2002 16:28

Ebusitanus wrote: What I take exception to, is this justification of this, undoubtful treachery, upon the German arms, with wage past afronts in Stalingrad, Krim, abusive charging of weapondry, truck requestions, command structure of German Army groups or shooting of coward elements.
Like I already said these examples were to show that the relationships were not like you may have thought, but colder. It is not my fault you are not able or willing to understand what I write.

Here is the justification of the actions:
Why stand a die together with the Germans who could not realize that they already lost the war? The same Germans that treated us like crap and taken land away from us?
Btw, as for shooting of cowards, how do you know that they were cowards? How can you judge this? Were you there? Who is the one "justifying" things now?
Ebusitanus wrote: Just state it like you just did Arkady, but don´t try to find honorable excuses for this act..like the Germans didn´t leave them any other alternative than to switch sides and declare war.
The Germans did not leave any other alternative.
Here is, again, the way events evolved:
Romania recognized that it was defeated and sued for peace. Hitler could not allow this, and so decided to replace the government, like he did in Hungary. Except for the fact that he was no longer successful. This is how things happened. What the hell did you expect the Romanian army to do? Just let the Germans march into Bucharest, because they used to be allies? I am not finding any "honorable" excuses. This is the way things happened.
Ebusitanus wrote: How can any Romaian soldier feel proud of taking that "victory" picture in Wiena?
Because they were happy the war was over and they lived to see it? :roll:

User avatar
Juha Hujanen
Member
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Mar 2002 11:32
Location: Suur-Savo,Finland

Post by Juha Hujanen » 10 Sep 2002 16:37

Ebusitanus wrote:There is something so unholy in that turncoat thing...going through your website I keep seeing those Romanians using German weapons to fight "the enemy". As a Romanian soldier who had fought with the Germans in Russia I would feel deeply ashamed of turning my weapons on my fromer allies. This goes as well for Finns and Italians, suddenly fighting on the "good side".
Politicians and soldiers of independ nations are responsible only for their OWN people and they should act for that what is best for their NATION.Fall 44 it was obvious that Germany would loose the war(Finnish army intelligence chef Paasonen told to Finnish parlament early 43 that Germany would loose the war).After very heavy and costly battles,Finnish army stopped the Russians at end of summer 44.Politicians negotiatet a peace threaty and Finland indepency was saved.What should Finns do?.Follow Germans to gotterdamrung?.The peace threaty said that Germans should be driven out from Finnish soil by force.Germans did start to retreat but timetable ser by Russians was impossible.They demanted that acts of war should be started 15.9.44.At start Germans retreated in peace and Finns followed slowly but Russians demanted that Finns should fight more agresseviveThey needed only a excuse to attack to Finland again.So half-hearted Finns were forced to fight.
But there was curious incidents.Sometimes Finns didnt shoot retreating Germans and first Finnish units arrived to Käsivarsi,they were warned by Germans not to attack.Germans had strong positions and they outnumbered Finns 1-10 and they counterattack would have destroyed weak Finnish forces.In Kilpisjärvi Germans forbided any active actions against Finns and only selfdefence was alloved,
For many Finns war against Germans was unpopular.Lt.Col. Laakso,commander of IR8 said to his men"Our duty is to fight,but we fight with heavy heart against Germans". General-Major Lagus troops caught 77 Germans in Pudasjärvi in September.Germans had stayed to warn Finns that they should not go too near an ammodump that they were about to explode.Finns arrested the men.German officers asked the permission to shoot themselves but Russians had demanted that Germans pows should be send to Soviet Union.When German pows were marched to captivety,General Lagus went away to forest that he wouldn't have to see that.He thought that episode was shameful.

As i said,Russians wanted only an excuse to attack again.In that stage of war we would have to fight alone without aid from anyone and we couldn't hold on for eternity.After that?.Mass executions,deportions to Siberia and end of Finnish indepence.I think our leaders made the right decision.

Juha

User avatar
Ebusitanus
Member
Posts: 535
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:12

Post by Ebusitanus » 10 Sep 2002 18:56

The way Juha Hujanen has put it is just as I would have expected a fromer ally forced against his natural will to act in such a situation...Halfhartly, regretfully...yes, thats how I see it too.

Now to Mr. Victor who seems to find more moral highground by begining now personal attacks on my person when he feels that his weak justifications of Romanian behaviour are not good enough.
What I meant through the examples I gave you was to show that the Germans were not really acting as allies, but more like masters and those special relationships among soldiers that you mentioned were not so warm.
You give slanted versions of puntual actions to make your case, trying to portray the German command as almost eager to use Romanians as cannon fodder with total disregard to their fate. If you want to say that Germans were aware of Romanian fighting inferiority (out of motivation or equipment) and thus did give them what they perceived as secondary tasks and kept the better equipment, scant supplies and support to the better German units then you are right. Germany was trying to win a war fast and succesfully and not archive some popularity contest by wasting precious resources. The key here is archiving of victory and were more than willing to sacrifice as much their own units and devoid of support and supplies their own units in secondary fronts. You want to make out of this some type of mythical hatered were it was not...in any event it suites you well in your later "justifications"..Like your Soviet masters treated you so good afterwards, eh?..Ah, but you got Transilvania right? Yeah..good.

You do not know the drama of the Romanian soldiers at Stalingrad. So please cut the rhetoric BS.
You asume much my friend, arrogance is an ill councellor...for starters I have read your heroic website.
It is not my fault you are not able or willing to understand what I write.
More personal attacks? your ad hominem wont give you any more factual weight.
Why stand a die together with the Germans who could not realize that they already lost the war? The same Germans that treated us like crap and taken land away from us?
Quite hipocritical comming from the same who had no problems running into Besarabia to get some land in that Campaign too. About the mistreatment..well, I gave my position on that already.
Btw, as for shooting of cowards, how do you know that they were cowards? How can you judge this? Were you there? Who is the one "justifying" things now?
Sorry, let me rephrase that one for you so that you can include it in your list of evil agravations done by Germans to the poor inocent deceived Romanians..."Germans had such hatered for their heroic allies that they kept picking them up and shooting them with no reason whatsoever, why should they need any reason..they were the masters, right?"
I am not finding any "honorable" excuses. This is the way things happened.
An overwhelmed ally would have done just as the Finns did...halfhartly, not from one day to the next opening borders and front lines to the Soviets to rollup the German flanks. I´m sad you don´t see the difference and the cost to the German troops there....To go then and condem the German attempt to rectify the issue which very much indeed afected their whole army group is a joke. "Oh the Romanian troops are surredering in masse and letting the Russians through and breaking up the whole front, we are loosing whole divisions and rear structures as we speak...But hey..they are letting some rear units through..nevermind the rest"...60.000 men losses..I rest my case.
The liberation term appears in many memoirs and interviews with veterans. They thought that they fought to liberate NW Transylvania. They did not think themselves as guilty of treason.
The sweet Liberation...gotta love those terms...everyone loved and still does to jump on the good side´s bandwagon..Its never to late.[/code]

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 10 Sep 2002 20:27

Ebusitanus

Answer this one simple question: What purpose would it have served Romania to have stayed within the Axis camp, be it through their choice or a coup/puppet regime?

:D Andy from the Shire

IAR80
Member
Posts: 184
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 21:05
Location: Satu Mare, Romania

re

Post by IAR80 » 10 Sep 2002 21:49

Ebusitanus, frankly, I don't know what whiped you up in this "trash the turncoat" frenzy, and I really don't care. The point is, the romanians fought alongside germans not because there is some ancient friendship between the two cultures, but because they had to. Ironically, the lands liberated during Barbarossa were ceded to Russia with the go-ahead of Berlin. The romanian soldier had no reason to be affectionate towards the german soldier after the Vienna Award. The reason Romania carried on after liberating the lands taken by the soviets was Hitler's unspoken, but constantly implied, promise of returning Transylvania if the romanian army performed well, so the whole campaign on the eastern front was a morbid contest with Hungary for the favor of the Fuhrer. There was no such "comradery" between the romanians and the germans, or any other kind of such close relationship between the soldiers of the two nations. As for the actual decision to switch sides, sure, betraying an ally is not a very nice thing, but there was no alliance between Romania and Germany in the true sense, more like Romania being a vassal of sorts to Germany. It's not a mutual interest that brought Romania and Germany together, Romania was dragged into this war, a war which lost all popular support after the Dniester was crossed into russian territory. Romania received practically the scraps which Germany could spare in terms of war material. So it would be utter masochism to be sypathetic towards such an "ally", from the highest levels to the level of the illiterate romanian peasant-soldier. In WWII history the situation of Romania was about choosing the "lesser of evils", actually, Romania never really did have much of a choice. The relationship between Romania and Germany at all levels never reached what can be quantified as "close", it was strictly necessity that brought these two countries on the same side of the barricade. So the day of 23rd of August 1944 was viewed as a natural follow up after Stalingrad, again, it's not like the romanians suddenly fell in love with the russians (which were much more distructive occupiers than the germans), it was simply choosing the lesser of evils, since there was a real threat of Romania disappearing as a nation if it went on fighting alongside the germans. The germans were never viewed as "friends", especially by the populance and the romanian foot soldiers, the relations being neutral at best. No, it's not mythical hatred, but the romanian percieved this kind of treatment coming from the germans that way, and come to think of it, who wouldn't? T

herefore, why should anyone be ashamed by betraying such a "close and devoted" *cough* bullsh*t *cough* ally?

The romanians smiling in Vienna are happy because their country is pretty much in one piece and they did their part in this struggle, they survived the war and naively believe the americans will soon come and liberate their country from the russians, and chances are these soldiers never fought alongside germans on the eastern front.

So, in conclusion, there is no shame in this... This is just like blaming the russians for pulling down the Iron Curtain between them and their american "allies", thus betraying the alliance. So you see, it was simply historical context which FORCED Romania to side with Germany, nothing more.

Also, I see you like the way the Finns balied out of their situation, slowly but surely. I'm sorry Ebusitanus, I apologise in the name of the romanian people for the fact that our geographical position is of strategic importance and that our soil containes notable amounts of oil, we are truly a bunch of bastard turncoats for this, we do not even come close to the honorable finns which are in the middle of nowhere with little strategic importance (no offense Juha, just making a point, that's all). The situation after the 23rd of August was volatile because of this very fact: geostrategic position and oil resources, the germans reacted much quicker and more agressively than in the case of Finalnd, there was simply no way to do it "politely", and NO WAY the germans were going to let their oil resources and the defensive line the Carpathians provided slip away, while Finland is the exact opposite (again, no offense, Juha). So, Ebusitanus, unless you have some twisted fantasies of Romania not surivivng WWII as a nation that you would like to share with this forum, I suggest you clam up because turning against the germans was the only way to salvage what Romania could slavage from the disaster that was the Eastern Front, and us staying with the germans to the bitter end would have definately not made the winning powers or history books look upon us kinder, it would have benefited no one and resulted only in more allied deaths, and somehow I guess that's what you want to hear, huh? Worthless romanian lives for the lives of those meddling allies and russians that stopped the Great Adolf Hitler, am I right?

So, do not pity us, as we have no sense of guilt when it comes to the events of the 23rd of August 1944 when we did the only reasonable thing a nation CAN do: choose the lesser of evils and hope for the best. And it's not like we betrayed some ancient friends, if that's what you are truly getting at, the relationship between Romania and Germany, given the kind of treatment received, is best described as vassalization (hence the term "axis sattelites") rather than alliance.
Of course, if the problem is "How could you betray the GREAT germans, the master race? You, a bunch of lowlifes?", then I can only pity you Ebusitanus.

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Victor » 11 Sep 2002 08:10

Ebusitanus wrote: Now to Mr. Victor who seems to find more moral highground by begining now personal attacks on my person when he feels that his weak justifications of Romanian behaviour are not good enough.
No, you are the one thinking that my justifications are not good enough. You are also the one seeking "moral highground" to make those backstabbing, treacherous, good for nothing Romanians be ashamed of what they did. As I already stated, I am not trying to justify anything. But again you do not want to understand what I write.
Ebusitanus wrote: You give slanted versions of puntual actions to make your case, trying to portray the German command as almost eager to use Romanians as cannon fodder with total disregard to their fate.
Of course that I as a backstabbing untrustworthy Romanian cannot say the right thing. It is beyond me, right? I believe that I am more familiar with the Romanian army in WWII, than you are. And I am not being overconfident.
Ebusitanus wrote: If you want to say that Germans were aware of Romanian fighting inferiority (out of motivation or equipment) and thus did give them what they perceived as secondary tasks and kept the better equipment, scant supplies and support to the better German units then you are right. Germany was trying to win a war fast and succesfully and not archive some popularity contest by wasting precious resources. The key here is archiving of victory and were more than willing to sacrifice as much their own units and devoid of support and supplies their own units in secondary fronts.
If you would read von Manstein’s memoirs you would see that his opinion was that the Romanian army was the one which subordinated itself with comments to the German command. But he also abused of the Romanian troops he had at his disposal, several times.
Ebusitanus wrote: You want to make out of this some type of mythical hatered were it was not...in any event it suites you well in your later "justifications”.
Have you read any account by Romanian veterans? Have you met any? Do you have Romanian relatives that lived during the war? People were raised to hate the Germans (but also to respect them). This was the result of WWI, when half the country was occupied by the Central Powers, there was a terrible plague and famine, refugees, etc.
Sure there were some good relationships between the soldiers in the beginning, but still there were problems, which were overcome. After Stalingrad things got worse and worse as the front approached Romania.

And, again, I am not trying to make out any "justification". I am only presenting a situation, which you do not seem to like.
Ebusitanus wrote: Like your Soviet masters treated you so good afterwards, eh?..Ah, but you got Transilvania right? Yeah..good.
No, they treated us much more worse. But what does this have to do with anything? This was the best solution, IMO. Can you come up with a better one?

Yes, getting Transylvania back was more important. Again, do you expect Romania to fight until the end for an insane leader of Germany? Why?
Ebusitanus wrote: You asume much my friend, arrogance is an ill councellor...for starters I have read your heroic website.
I have chose not to write all about what happened at Stalingrad. My site can only give you a general idea of the military operations. But if you want I can give more details.
Ebusitanus wrote: More personal attacks? your ad hominem wont give you any more factual weight.
Nope, it was just an observation.
Ebusitanus wrote: Quite hipocritical comming from the same who had no problems running into Besarabia to get some land in that Campaign too.
Well, the Germans seemed then to be able to win a war with the SU. And since Romania had some scores to settle with its neighbor and could not do it on its own, why not? But when Germany lost the war and continued to fight without sense, why die for something which was already lost? Especially since there was another piece of land which Romania wanted?
Ebusitanus wrote: Sorry, let me rephrase that one for you so that you can include it in your list of evil agravations done by Germans to the poor inocent deceived Romanians..."Germans had such hatered for their heroic allies that they kept picking them up and shooting them with no reason whatsoever, why should they need any reason..they were the masters, right?"
It was already included. No need to rephrase, but thank you! :D

No matter the reason, the Romanians should have been shot by the Romanian army and not by the Germans.
Btw, who shot the German "wargod-general" that concentrated the bulk of German forces inside Stalingrad and exposed the flanks or the guy who the ignored the reports of massive Soviet concentrations?
Ebusitanus wrote: An overwhelmed ally would have done just as the Finns did...halfhartly, not from one day to the next opening borders and front lines to the Soviets to rollup the German flanks. I´m sad you don´t see the difference and the cost to the German troops there
Again, what better solution can you come up with? Do you think that if Romania told Hitler: Hey we want to get out this one! We lost! Hitler would just have said: No problem, I will just retreat my troops on the borders!. Are you that naïve? This was, Imo, the only solution. This or total annihilation by the Soviet forces?
Ebusitanus wrote: 60.000 men losses..I rest my case.
Well, 61,000 were lost only in the fights with the Romanian army after 24 August!
Ebusitanus wrote: The sweet Liberation...gotta love those terms...everyone loved and still does to jump on the good side´s bandwagon
Let me ask a question: did or did not the German soldiers that marched into the Sudetenland think themselves as liberators?
The same thing happened here. The soldiers considered NW Transylvania as Romanian land, under foreign occupation. What other term should they used? Btw, the same terms were used at the beginning of the war, in Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. Why do you not object to their use there?

Ovidius
Member
Posts: 1414
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 19:04
Location: Romania

Post by Ovidius » 11 Sep 2002 10:32

Comment for Victor:

Daca te bagi în tarâte, te vor mânca porcii.... :mrgreen:

~Ovidius

IAR80
Member
Posts: 184
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 21:05
Location: Satu Mare, Romania

re

Post by IAR80 » 11 Sep 2002 10:58

Or:

Nu te lua la tranta cu porcul in mocirla, ca lui ii place

User avatar
Ebusitanus
Member
Posts: 535
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:12

Post by Ebusitanus » 11 Sep 2002 13:40

Why do you keep getting me wrong here..damnation!...I have not critiziced the fact that Romania did the best for her own interest when defecting. I have no problem and never had it with it.
What I have a problem with is when "excuses" and nice reason are looked for desperately to make look this betrayal less..mhh..treacherous. Just like when Germans will go on finding reasons for excusing German invasion of Poland based on polish treatment of German population or Preventive strike against Russia. Pragmatism is the word...Germany or Romania did what they had to do to win or to their best interest..End of story...To begin pulling sad stories of mistreatment of Romanian troops, expensive weapon dealings, Vienna awards, and WWI loyalities is totally pathetic. Just say...Romania did so because it was the best to do..end of story...Its like you try to say that if Germany had given Transylvania to Romaina, given Romanian troops the best equipment, etc..that Romanian would not have done just the same. Do you understand now what I mean?
On the other hand, to try to whitewash Romania from the logic German reaction to the whole front breaking apart with tens of thousands of German troops getting anihilated by saying that Germany went to try to topple the turncoat Romanian Goverment and thus deserved all Romanian troops marching all the way to Wiena is hilarious. Do you think Romania didn´t know or expect the consequences that opening the front lines would have upon Germany?

Ovidius
Member
Posts: 1414
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 19:04
Location: Romania

Post by Ovidius » 11 Sep 2002 15:50

Ebusitanus wrote:I have not critiziced the fact that Romania did the best for her own interest when defecting. I have no problem and never had it with it.
What I have a problem with is when "excuses" and nice reason are looked for desperately to make look this betrayal less..mhh..treacherous.
If you do look here:

http://www.thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/v ... php?t=5750

you'll see what I've had to say about the issue.

I see I have to repeat the following: that to gain a truce with the Soviets, if possible, was more or less(with emphasis on "more or less") acceptable considering the circumstances, and any other country(see Italy and Finland) would have done just the same, even if that meant a clash with the Germans(who knew just as well what they had to fight for). On the other side, to cross the Western border after October 25, 1944, in Hungary/Czechoslovakia/Austria, was, IMO, a crime(although necessary - follow the link above to see why).
Ebusitanus wrote:Just like when Germans will go on finding reasons for excusing German invasion of Poland based on polish treatment of German population or Preventive strike against Russia. Pragmatism is the word...
Or Americans finding reasons to hang Third Reich leaders in Nuremberg and so on. This is called "Political Correctness"

~Ovidius

User avatar
Juha Hujanen
Member
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Mar 2002 11:32
Location: Suur-Savo,Finland

Post by Juha Hujanen » 11 Sep 2002 16:17

One odd thing.When Finland started hostilities agains Germans,no volunteers came to fight from communists who were in prisons because they didn't want to fight against Soviet Union.Not a single one.Funny,one might think that they would be first one to fight against facism :roll:

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Victor » 11 Sep 2002 16:24

Ebusitanus wrote: Why do you keep getting me wrong here..damnation!...I have not critiziced the fact that Romania did the best for her own interest when defecting. I have no problem and never had it with it.
Then why did you said that Romanian veterans should feel ashamed? :?
Ebusitanus wrote: What I have a problem with is when "excuses" and nice reason are looked for desperately to make look this betrayal less..mhh..treacherous.
It seems to me that you have problems with people showing you that things are not just black and white.
Ebusitanus wrote: To begin pulling sad stories of mistreatment of Romanian troops, expensive weapon dealings, Vienna awards, and WWI loyalities is totally pathetic
For the 10th time: I DID THAT TO SHOW YOU THAT THERE WAS NO LOVE-AFFARIR BETWEEN ROMANIANS AND GERMANS, AS YOU ASSUMED!!!
Maybe it bothers you that the Germans were not exactly the gallant allies you seem to think they were and those treacherous, cut-throat Romanians betrayed them. If you want to judge, do it when you know all the facts.
Ebusitanus wrote: Just say...Romania did so because it was the best to do..end of story.
Where were you the last days? What was I saying all this time?
Ebusitanus wrote: Its like you try to say that if Germany had given Transylvania to Romaina, given Romanian troops the best equipment, etc..that Romanian would not have done just the same. Do you understand now what I mean?
I understand, but such a scenario would presume that the Germans would win the war, because they had enough equipment for them and their allies. :D
Ebusitanus wrote: On the other hand, to try to whitewash Romania from the logic German reaction to the whole front breaking apart with tens of thousands of German troops getting anihilated by saying that Germany went to try to topple the turncoat Romanian Goverment and thus deserved all Romanian troops marching all the way to Wiena is hilarious.
I was not saying that. I was only showing the chain of events. Something you very conveniently skipped, in order to bash those Romanians who "launched unprovoked attacks" on the poor, defenseless Germans.
The march to Vienna (actually only a tank regiment operated in Austria, the bulk of the army was in Czechoslovakia) was the natural continuation of the war, until the enemy was defeated. The Romanian army could not just stop on the 1940 frontier. The same thing happened in 1941 in the SU, but I do not see you complain about the Romanian troops marching to Stalingrad. I wonder why? :roll:
Ebusitanus wrote: Do you think Romania didn´t know or expect the consequences that opening the front lines would have upon Germany?
I do not know what exactly was expected. The defenses of the capital do not really show it. But they probably did. But, again, can you come up with a better solution?

User avatar
Cezarprimo
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 10:28

Romania

Post by Cezarprimo » 12 Sep 2002 13:41

Ohh... this theme again...

For Mr. Ebustanius:
Betrial implies a friendly relationship. This friendly relation did not exist between romanians and germans in wwii.

The germans forced Romania's hand the whole time, they didn't treat Romania as a friend but as a subject. So, what did the romanians betrayed ?

They looked for their interests the best way they could and that's everything to this end.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 13 Sep 2002 20:32

Daca te bagi în tarâte, te vor mânca porcii
Nu te lua la tranta cu porcul in mocirla, ca lui ii place


C'mon guys let us in on the joke or do we need a Romanian moderator :wink:

:D Andy from the Shire

IAR80
Member
Posts: 184
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 21:05
Location: Satu Mare, Romania

re

Post by IAR80 » 13 Sep 2002 21:42

Ok, ok...

I'll translate these, but Ebusitanus isn't gonna like this...

So, for the first remark:

If you jump in the bran, the pigs will eat you up

and...

Don't wrestle a pig in a mud pit, because he likes it

Happy? :wink:

Return to “Minor Axis Nations”