Interesting article about Romanian Army in Afghanistan...

Why such a fuss for that picture? Even if he was a Romanian, the picture was obviously fake.

You must be joking, right?

Please answer the following questions:

1. Is it not clear to you that the soldier in the initial photo is not wearing a Romanian uniform?
2. Is it not clear to you that he is not wearing a Romanian vest?
3. Is it not clear to you that even if he was to wear the older Romanian kevlar vest (although I have not seen one photo so far with Romanians in the new uniforms with vests that aren't also in desert camo), those older vests are different from the one that soldier is wearing?

The picture was recieved by a friend of mine from a guy who has a advertising company.
The friend who sent it to wasn't aware that I "deal" with militaria stuff.He was upset and that's all.

You must be joking, right?

Please answer the following questions:

1. Is it not clear to you that the soldier in the initial photo is not wearing a Romanian uniform?
2. Is it not clear to you that he is not wearing a Romanian vest?
3. Is it not clear to you that even if he was to wear the older Romanian kevlar vest (although I have not seen one photo so far with Romanians in the new uniforms with vests that aren't also in desert camo), those older vests are different from the one that soldier is wearing?

Judging by the photos at hand (and please note my own comparison), NO, it is not clear.
I dont see how things are so perfectly clear so early for you. Maybe I am wrong, but there are 2 different romanian uniform types in Afghanistan, how can that be a reference point for those in Irak? There could be 2 different ones in Irak too.
Also note that the weapon's holding band that crosses the kevlar. In 2 photos they are similar. One from Afghanistan (romanian) and one from Irak (the incriminated picture). Compared with the picture of a US soldiers' m16 band which is black and less thick, they see to point out to a common romanian origin.
But like I said, there is too little info to tell something without reasonable doubt.
I'm just surprised you can do that despite the discrepancies.

I see you haven't actually bothered to answer my questions. I have put forward 3 questions, you said no. No to which? All of them?
I know I have glasses, but you don't need a perfect vision to see that the soldier in that photo isn't wearing the Romanian model 2002 uniform. Probably only your prejudice regarding Irak stops you from seeing it.

The feeling is mutual.

You are wrong. There aren't two different uniform types in Afghanistan. It is only one. During their first tour in Afghanistan, the 26th Battalion was sent in with the regular 1990 and 1994 forest camo uniforms, but during their mission there, the Romanian army adopted the new model 2002 uniform, identical to the British camo. The British uniforms were manufactured in Romania, so they could be produced here easily, and it is a very practical uniform. Inside the country, there are still model 1990 and 1994 camo uniforms worn in units. The conversion to the new ones isn't over yet. The professional soldiers going in missions outside Romania, all wear the model 2002 uniforms, especially those in Irak and Afghanistan, because only the model 2002 has a desert camo version. It is the first desert camo uniform in the Romanian army. But of course, if you have any photographic evidence of Romanian troops in a different type of desert camo, by all means bring it forward, in order to give some substance to your statements.

As for how could the uniforms in Afghanistan be used as a reference point for those in Irak, you have to think at the fact that we are talking about uniforms. This, by itself, implies that things are the same, especially since both theatres of war require desert camo. But you can see Romanian troops in Irak, from the 812th Battalion in the below photo. Also from Observatorul Militar.

Again, you surely can't be serious. The band the Romanian has over the shoulder is not of his weapon, but of a pouch.

But lets' look at the kevlar vests. The photo of the US soldier you provided is very good. The vest worn by the soldier of the 26th Battalion is obviously of a a different type as that of one the "incriminated soldier" is wearing:
-it doesn't have a camo pattern, just one color;
-it has neck protection;
-it has large shoulder pads;
-it has two stripes, positioned lower than the three on the vest the "incriminated soldier" is wearing.

On the other side, the American vest in your photo has the same camo patter and the same three stripes.

What discrepencies?
1. Is he wearing a Romanian camo uniform? Yes/No
2. Is he wearing a Romanian vest, be it even the older model? Yes/No

To me the answers are more than obvious.

Attached Image

Like I said, judging from the photos, for me things are not so clear as they are for you. Do you have a problem with that? Since when being not sure of something is a crime around here. I just said I cannot say he is or he is not romanian, and without further info I cannot venture to give a clear verdict just by watching the pictures at hand. I did not try to convince you of anything.
The pictures are from 2 different theaters. Do you have pictures of romanians from Irak with collars on their kevlars?

Probably you're too worked out by that to bring it in this discussion which has nothing to do with it. But to clarify, my only prejudice regarding Irak is that a country should not be occupied by foreign troops regardless of the latter's excuses. Hell of a "prejudice" huh? Funny thing that prejudice ended up in international law too. But I'm sure the brave new generation of MTV kids will make sure the world gets rid of that pesky old times "prejudice". Brave new world...

Is it so hard for you to answer two simple questions? The last photo I posted is with Romanian troops in Irak. You can see their vests very clearly.

Anyway, I said what I wanted to say and think that I proved my case. Others can judge for themselves.

Btw, I showed C-2's image to a friend today. He said he saw the same image, with another text that advertised printing in the LEU Dorm.

I think I answered your questions. The answer was NO.
And I also think it was agreed the text is obviously edited and lots of people used the picture for all kinds of messages.

This post has been edited by Imperialist on July 24, 2005 06:23 pm

Off topic message was deleted.

The post of valachus included the following find on the Internet:
http://politics.abovetopsecret.com/thread40739/pg2

One more site stating that the picture depicts Lance Cpl. Ted J. Boudreaux Jr., a reservist with Headquarters and Service Company, 3rd Battalion, 23rd Marines, a New Orleans-based infantry unit deployed in Iraq from May to September of 2003: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Sign of the Times.

Good find! Thanks!

Short article about the soldiers' complaints regarding the TAB 77's and TAB 79's performance in Afghanistan and the romanian industry's capability to produce the new Zimbrul:

http://www.gandul.info/2005-09-28/actual/masinile_de_lupta

Hmm. So Dragos was right all along, it looks like?

The interesting thing to me about all this is how it shows, once again, that news photos are now suspect and unreliable; guilty until proved innocent.

IMO,this is really a remarkable change in our time. Suddenly, nothing pictorial can be taken at face value.

No wonder we are all become cynics?

Nice to see that picture with an BRDM/ABC (?) in first, and one TAB in the back, almost unseen...

So, if i'm not so sleepy this morning, TAB 77 is the equivalent of BTR 60, and TAB 79 is the same for BTR 70 (source - an e-book with subject focused on APC and AFV). Zimbru is new, but is not in current OOB of Romanian Army? If it is, why they don't are in Afganistan?

Iama