Romania in NATO

[Chandernagore]

[quote]One question, which leaves me a bit puzzled: What's up with France spending so much money on their military? 2.5% of their GDP, and even in terms of the straight amount of money, higher than either Germany or Great Britain.
Not very consistent with their "Make love, not war" political attitude.

Are they working on a goofy project, like another Maginot line or something like that? :wink: [/quote]

Mmm. Considering that the US concentrate about 40% of the world military power I'm not sure that it's France that should be pointed out :wink:
However they have no "Make love, not war" attitude any more than other democratic countries. They have several commitments in Africa, a rather high standard army and industry producing every single piece of equipment they needs. This is reflected in their spendings.

[A C]

[quote]Be careful that you don't become cannon fodder for U.S. imperial adventures. Otherwise, I wish Romania the best in its new alliance.[/quote]

Yes. Everyone knows the US has colonies in Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afganistan. I am sure we will wipe out Romania and re-colonize it as well. Some people aren't very bright. :roll:

[Chandernagore]

[quote][quote]Be careful that you don't become cannon fodder for U.S. imperial adventures. Otherwise, I wish Romania the best in its new alliance.[/quote]

Yes. Everyone knows the US has colonies in Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afganistan. I am sure we will wipe out Romania and re-colonize it as well. Some people aren't very bright. :roll:[/quote]

I think he just meant that there is a concern about providing US/NATO manpower ("cannonfodder") for not very popular causes...

[Najroda]

How estranged do you have to be from life on earth, to simply ignore the fact that since it's own membership in 1999, Hungary has been one of the biggest (if not the biggest) supporter of Romania's NATO membership (EU membership idem), and say how happy they are Romania joined the EU because of Transylvania.

My personal opinion is that Hungary has been, and still is way too generous and should have insisted on fulfilment of all the justified demands of the Transylvanian Hungarians, in exchange for it's support.

Once Romania will be a NATO and EU member, it will be much more difficult to get, for example, self-determination for the Transylvanian Hungarians, because Romanian politics has proven to be unwlling to reform, unless it is forced to. And the only carrot it big enough to force Romania to Europeanize, even if halfheartedly, was/is the prospect of NATO and EU membership.

But nevertheless, congratulations and welcome to the club. I hope I am just in an overly pessimistic mood today and that I will be proven wrong

[dragos]

Najroda, I won't let this topic turn in another Romanian-Hungarian issue. You are warned.

[Florin]

QUOTE

....... since it's own membership in 1999, Hungary has been one of the biggest (if not the biggest) supporter of Romania's NATO membership (EU membership idem).......

Oh... This is interesting.
Can you offer more detailed information about that?
Let say, official documents forwarded by Hungary to support Romania's membership in NATO or EU. Or just some speech of the Hungarian delegates to these organizations. Or something like this...

[dragos]

I renew my demand not to start another Hungarian-Romanian debate. To speak of self-determination or autonomy is totally inappropriate here. Najorda has been warned, so don't push him.

[Najroda]

Good heavens, Florin, do you ever read a newspaper? Did you really miss the Hungarian support for Romania's NATO membership, which culminated in the Budapest parliament ratifying Romania's NATO membership?

For example, I cannot imagine that the Romanian press didn't report on the Hungarian-Romanian intergovernmental conference on European integration, in Budapest, last february, when Hungarian defense minister Ferenc Juhász and Mircea Geoana said the following things. Juhász: "It is Hungary's interest that Romania joins the NATO and EU a soon as possible, so that we can together fight against natural catastrophes, and for enduring peace and stability in the region". Geoana: "Hungary is an exceptional partner of Romania". Before this, Geoana made a very interesting observation at a press conference: "Ten years ago, among Romania's neighbours we had the closest relationship with Moldova, and probably the coolest with Hungary. By today the completely opposite situation has arised."

This is just one example, I can give you more, if you want. of course occasionally old reflexes of distrust and xenophobia still pop up on both sides, as you just demonstrated, but when it comes to the official policy of Hungary's democratically elected government, I stand behind my statement that Romania has no bigger supporter of it's European aspirations than Hungary.

[Najroda]

Dragos, thank you for your warning, I know I can always count on a special treatment from you. I just want to point out that if Florin wasn't off topic when he mentioned Transylvania (which BTW according to certain forum members doesn't even exist) in relation to NATO membership, then neither was I, since my post was merely a reaction to his, and it completely related to Romania's NATO membership. Even the word "autonomy" was used in this context. It surely does not function as a red cloth with you, does it?

[dragos]

(which BTW according to certain forum members doesn't even exist). If I remeber corectly, it is about a post of Geto-Dacul, in a response to a dissociation between Transylvania and Romania. He wanted to underline that Transylvania is Romania. Najroda doesn't miss any opportunity to bring in discussion Transylvanian Hungarians autonomy. Unfortunately, here it is not the right place for such approaches. I think you would be more successful on Hungarian revisionist sites.

[Najroda]

QUOTE

(which BTW according to certain forum members doesn't even exist). If I remeber corectly, it is about a post of Geto-Dacul, in a response to a dissociation between Transylvania and Romania.

Actually there was no dissociation, except in Geto-Dacul's head and apparently he succeeded to cinvince you too.

QUOTE

He wanted to underline that Transylvania is Romania.

Which is incorrect. "is part of" would be correct, but it was as off-topic a remark as it is now.

QUOTE

Najroda doesn't miss any opportunity to bring in discussion Transylvanian Hungarians autonomy.

In most cases, like in this one, I only join an ongoing contribution. I know my opinions are different and therefore bother certain individuals but that has never prevented me from speaking.

QUOTE

Unfortunately, here it is not the right place for such approaches. I think you would be more successful on Hungarian revisionist sites.

Why do you confuse autonomy with revisionism? You keep amazing me...

[dragos]

QUOTE

QUOTE (which BTW according to certain forum members doesn't even exist). If I remeber corectly, it is about a post of Geto-Dacul, in a response to a dissociation between Transylvania and Romania. Actually there was no dissociation, except in Geto-Dacul's head and apparently he succeeded to cinvince you too. QUOTE He wanted to underline that Transylvania is Romania. Which is incorrect. "is part of" would be correct, but it was as off-topic a remark as it is now.

Geto-Dacu wrote:

QUOTE

It is not a different notion. We talk of a delimitation on a territory. Budapest is a inhabited delimitation on Hungarian territory. \"Transylvania\" is an inhabited delimitation on Romanian territory. We are strictly talking of political delimitations (By the way, Transylvania does not exist anymore, it is WESTERN and CENTRAL ROMANIA ).

http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/viewtopic.ph...php?p=7719#7719

Transylvania is to Romania as Banat, Crisana, Dobrogea, Maramures, Moldova, Muntenia, Oltenia are (i.e. designation of historical provinces). All of them are Romania.

QUOTE

QUOTE Najroda doesn't miss any opportunity to bring in discussion Transylvanian Hungarians autonomy. In most cases, like in this one, I only join an ongoing contribution. I know my opinions are different and therefore bother certain individuals but that has never prevented me from speaking. QUOTE Unfortunately, here it is not the right place for such approaches. I think you would be more successful on Hungarian revisionist sites. Why do you confuse autonomy with revisionism? You keep amazing me...

Any contributions to such requests, as autonomy, independence, separation etc, is not welcomed on this forum. Period.

This thread needs a break, so it is temporary closed.

[Indrid]

HURAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
we entered NATO!!!!!!!!!!!!
..............
..............
...............
ok, what do we do now?


Najroda, on behalf of most Forum members, have some respect an STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

ok, what do we do now?

You sit on your butt

Did you think it was a blank check to invade China ? :wink:

[Chandernagore]

The goal of NATO during the cold war was 100% defense versus the Warsaw pact, with no offensive agenda. Given that the goal of the Warsaw pact was also 100% defensive vs NATO both organizations where remarkably and utterly useless :laugh: