Romanian & Hungarian war-crimes

Even without getting into the details of this book (I don't have it handy anyway), it's enough to observe that it was published by Editura Politica (not even by Editura Militara - a much more appropriate publishing forum for such a work that pretends to be a history book), in 1985, at the height of Ceausescu's national-communist regime.

These are your only arguments?? I can’t believe my eyes. Seeing how vocal you were against this book I’ve expected to see entire list of reasons - or at least some credible ones - to be put forward. With what you have, you are wasting everybody’s time. I expected some arguments from within the book, dealing with the way the documentation was done and the sources were used, and you come with nothing.

I clearly stated that I don't have the book handy (I have better usage of my luggages' payload when I fly back than to carry the aforementioned book about "horthysts" and "fascists"). Explain it, please, how can I comment on the book's specific details if I don't have access to it?

I've read the book in the late 1980s, not necessarily right after it was published. That happened about 18-20 years ago.
To answer your question, back then I was in my '20s (like many current participants of this forum). I don't know how were (are) you in your '20s, but I can assure you that I was fully capable of understanding what has been written in the book and the political motives behind it being published.

FYI, I was unfortunate enough to fully experience first hand the "benefits" of Ceausescu's regime. You don't need to explain to me how those time were.
The adjective 'national-communist' is not a cliché, but a characteristic I personally experienced long enough, thus I don't need to "do a little more documented research".

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on June 20, 2005 08:52 pm

I agree.

Perhaps I overreacted a bit, moved by the deep disillusion of reading the said inflammatory posts, which collectively imply a pattern of barbarism to a whole people - despite the authors' later distancing from this obvious intent - instead of reading interesting details related to the military history of Rumania - the very goal of this forum.

There is a Canadian saying, pertinent to my above lines: if something moves like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like a duck, then it's a duck. I baptised the duck upsetting him/her in the process.

Gen. Dénes

P.S. We should split this thread and rename it: "the futile thread that solves nothing and leads nowhere."

This post has been edited by Dénes on June 20, 2005 09:49 pm

Thanks, Dragos03, for yet another personal insult. No problem.

Regarding the Treznea incident, I quoted the Hungarian version in order to also show the other side's take on the unfortunate events, as recorded soon after.
I did not (would not!) say that that's the only credible version, as I always try to include all involved parties' accounts of a certain event and find the version closest to the ultimate truth, no matter how "politically correct" it might be. Apparently, that's not your style of documentation. Again, no problem from my part. Carry on.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on June 20, 2005 09:15 pm

Even without getting into the details of this book (I don't have it handy anyway), it's enough to observe that it was published by Editura Politica (not even by Editura Militara - a much more appropriate publishing forum for such a work that pretends to be a history book), in 1985, at the height of Ceausescu's national-communist regime.

These are your only arguments?? I can’t believe my eyes. Seeing how vocal you were against this book I’ve expected to see entire list of reasons - or at least some credible ones - to be put forward. With what you have, you are wasting everybody’s time. I expected some arguments from within the book, dealing with the way the documentation was done and the sources were used, and you come with nothing.

I clearly stated that I don't have the book handy (I have better usage of my luggages' payload when I fly back than to carry the aforementioned book about "horthysts" and "fascists"). Explain it, please, how can I comment on the book's specific details if I don't have access to it?

I've read the book in the late 1980s, not necessarily right after it was published. That happened about 18-20 years ago.
To answer your question, back then I was in my '20s (like many current participants of this forum). I don't know how were (are) you in your '20s, but I can assure you that I was fully capable of understanding what has been written in the book and the political motives behind it being published.

FYI, I was unfortunate enough to fully experience first hand the "benefits" of Ceausescu's regime. You don't need to explain to me how those time were.
The adjective 'national-communist' is not a cliché, but a characteristic I personally experienced long enough, thus I don't need to "do a little more documented research".

Gen. Dénes

This is never-never ending, but al least you are a person with whom I can discuss with arguments .

I didn't questioned your capacity of social and political understanding (don't ask about how mine was in my early 20's, I had a long childhood ) but your level of historical expertise, given your relatively young age the fact that this was a totalitarian regime. Also we know the intensity of the reaction this type of repressive system could generate from the part of the citizens against anything perceived as official propaganda. And we have both agreed that the book had a propagandistic message.

As for the regime itself, I made fine tuning of what you said. In my view it was a personal/family-type totalalitarian regime (some analysts called it of a "sultanistic" type) using national-communist-type rethorics; and there is a difference and maybe sometime we'll have the time to talk about it.

But the book validity as secondary source remains untouched until now. If the facts mentioned have been correctly documented, regardless the propaganda employed, then the book could be used to quote those facts...

This post has been edited by Agarici on June 21, 2005 07:27 am

That's it!
I had it!
I'm banning you all !

No ! second thought,the forum will be left without members..
I'm flying away.

Photo: Ju 87 Stuka diving

This post has been edited by C-2 on June 20, 2005 09:46 pm

And here you are, stepping in Victor's footsteps. This is again disappointing for me. How was it so obvious, my original intent? Do you know me in person to make such personal allegations? What entitles you to think that in my first post I was myself the racist, chauvist and xenophobe and that I was a hypocrite posting the last one, about multiculturalism? Do you know what I do in my day to day life to say that?

The use of this thread could be summarized in a proposition: that in spite of all the horrors presented in my first post, the humanity never was never absent, all those years. So we can find it without forgetting or falsifying the past from the perspective of the present political correctness, as some would like to do. And I think this has both the power of a warning and of an example.
But when someone is prejudiced as you are, nothing can make him happy. With that I think I've said enough.

This post has been edited by Agarici on June 20, 2005 09:40 pm

Please review what you posted on Jun 18 2005, 12:55 AM and the edited on Jun 18 2005, 01:06 AM. Those are personal remarks IMO.

First of all he didn't say that you incite to ethnic hatred, but if that someone makes statements regarding such crimes, without providing some evidence is inciting ethnic hatred. Then he asked you for sources. It didn't look like a personal attack to me and if it was one you had to report it to the admins. You used the personal attacks you so much resent and started patronizing (also something you said you resent). You are way too to sensitive and jumpy IMO and take things too personal for a virtual forum. I didn't need to quote your entire post. Just the last phrase, which I put in bold, was enough IMO. For your information, Sid does know more on Romania and this part of the world, than its place on the map and I think that would have been obvious from the posts he made in the military history part of the forum. But if you don't belive me, go on Feldgrau.net and do a search for the word Romania and see who and what posted in the threads were the word appears.

Actually I did deny the first fact you posted and even mentioned the source (the Baba Novac execution). You haven't challenged it yet. The rest of the facts you posted included only one episode with skinning, not enough IMO to prove that there was "culture" for such a thing.

I see that you have an inclination to oversimplifying things and generalizations. Unlike you (or at least this is how it seems to me), I don't take discussions on these forums personal. My personal life is outside it and with the exception of Dragos, Dan Po and C-2, whom I know well I can't say that other of the members here are part of it at this moment. I don't hold grudges, but I think that I am entitled to have opinions about the people I meet in here, just like anyone else can have one about me. Those who know me well can judge me and only their opinion counts for me. I don't have anything to prove here.

And here you are, stepping in Victor's footsteps. This is again disappointing for me. How was it so obvious, my original intent?

sid guttridge initially wrote that:

To which you replied:

I've already answered to each and every of your points, more than once for some of them. I won't do it again and again just because you don't want to understand. You should read what I wrote and maybe learn to admit when you are wrong or have made a mistake, or accept that some might simply not agree with you. It appears that you absolutely lack this ability, essential in my opinion for a moderator.

Also form now on you should refrain yourself from any comments or innuendos about my personal life. You are right, I am maybe less placid than other members and I will accept no bullshit from you. We all know about your faculty, dance classes and site you have to deal with... oh and you have a personal life too. I've noticed your quite vicious habit to imply that the persons who spend much time around here don't have one. You should be rather glad that they populate and animate your site and forum. But for me, I have a job and also some other projects apart from that, each requiring probably more focus than all you activities together do, when I have to work for them.

This post has been edited by Agarici on June 21, 2005 09:10 am

I don't insinuate, as it doesn't characterize me. I usually just speak my mind, without useless subtleties. For what it's worth I was just explaining to you why I have no heartfeelings against you as you claimed. But you can understand and interpret my words anyway you wish according to your prejudice against me (or anyone else that you feel that offended you). I can't speaking about others and their personal lives, because I don't know what they do most of the day, when they are not in here. I can only speak about myself. Having said that, the discussion is over from my side.

A document made by the Romanian Ministry of Internal Affairs gives the following numbers of Romanian victims in Northern Transilvania, during 30 August 1940- 1 November 1941:
- 919 killed
- 1126 tortured
- 4126 beaten
- 15893 arrested
- 124 desecrations (of churches and graves)
- 525 houses destroyed

An interesting case is that of the death of Romanian priest Aurel Munteanu, from the town of Huedin. On 10 September 1940 he was tortured and beaten for four hours in the middle of the town, until he was killed, by 21 Hungarian citizens. They scalped his head and his beard and they killed him by sticking a pole in his mouth until it penetrated his head. They also killed another Romanian who tried to help the priest (Nicula Gheorghe).

What is interesting about this case is the sentence of the Royal Hungarian Court in Cluj, in the murderers' trial in 1941. 13 men were accused, of those only 7 were found guilty for "beatings leading to death". They were sentenced 2-3 months of jail.

A quote from the sentence (that was published as a brochure in 1941 in Cluj) details the excuses found by the court for the low punishment: "they were never punished before, they were in an emotional state that explains their sorrow and strong emotions that could easily lead to excesses from those happy about the liberation and driven by high patriotic feelings."

So, the court considered that the brutal torture and murder of a priest was a simple "excess" from people with "high patriotic feelings".

The court also found the motive of this horrific crime: "the mobile of their act was that feeling common to all humans, that is normal for all the true members of a proud nation". No comment.

The study is published in detail on the page of the Legionary Movement:

http://www.miscarea.com/transilvania7.htm

Dragos03, what's exactly your point in listing all these statistics and individual cases?

Based on this thread's title, one could also list similar statistics on Rumanian attrocities against ethnic Hungarians in Southern Transylvania (1940-1944) and Northern Transylvania (after Sept. 1945). But what would be achieved?
Nothing constructive, IMO.

Gen. Dénes

P.S. What's the published source you took the info from (unless you found the documents in the archives)? Isn't it, by any chance, the infamous 'Teroarea Horthysta...' book?

This post has been edited by Dénes on September 20, 2005 04:28 pm