20 years after....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8417046.stm

A good documentary was this evening on TVR2.

There were presented the foreign elements (Soviet "tourists") that were present in our country until late '90, and the special units of resistance from various branches, that were activated after 22 December, by whoever controlled the media . Those who were caught were released in January 1990. There are two more years before the guilt is prescribed (15 years + half of this period, because the prosecution was paused many times, that is about 22 years), so there is reason the truth not to be spoken out loud yet.

In my opinion it was a coup, that's why the identity of the "terrorists" is covered. They played a role in that coup otherwise in a revolution all logic says that the ones trying to suppress it would be exposed and punished.

Also consider that for the coup to be successful a lot of elements from the political echelons and the army had to be "bought". The promise of protecting them and allowing them to take part in normal life without "lustratie" could have been the price of that barter.

http://adevarul.ro/societate/dupa_20_de_an..._175782998.html

Isn't a coup something that happens from "top down"? Usually, the military brass and/or political bigs seize control of communications, transportation, power supplies, and of course the guns, ....and before anyone knows what happened it's fait accompli time! Hello new regime.

By all accounts, wasn't whatever happened in Romania, December 1989 a far messier affair? Crowds marching, soldiers switching sides, refusing to fire on crowds (or not), much smoke and confusion?

I don't wanna start a food fight here...i know how sensitive this topic can be...but calling it a "coup" seems to me leaves much out.

The most chilling thing I ever saw in Ro was in a History museum: an ordinary, well worn woollen sweater once belonging to a student in Bucahrest. There was a bloody hole in it where he was shot dead in Dec. 1989 during the "events".

Didn't look like something a coup d'etat perpetrator would be caught wearing..dead or alive.

btw; Happy Anniversary.

The population dissent was accumulated in years. All that was needed were some sparks to start the riot.

What most of us mean by "coup" regarding '89 events is that the succession in power of Ion Iliescu was established before the overthrowing of Ceausescu's regime, thing that wasn't known to the people that actually took part in the revolution.

The soldiers did not refuse to fire, they were ordered to withdraw to their bases. Despite the fact that Ceausescu, the supreme commander by law, took direct control of the army at 9 AM on December 22, General Stanculescu ordered the army to stand down at 11 AM. That allowed the revolutionaries to occupy the television and start broadcasting what they pleased throughout the country. Moreover, at 2 PM Stanculescu ordered the Army to protect the revolutionary-controlled TV station, the Radio station, the Telecommunications' Palace and other strategic sites. At 3 PM the country's supreme commander was "arrested" in a military base. That very evening Ion Iliescu appeared on TV and announced the creation of a new political structure - the National Salvation Front.

So what happened IMO was that a popular revolt was more or less naturally "sparked" and was then used by elements of the regime to stage a coup and then to give power over to an already formed political structure.

The soldiers did not refuse to fire, they were ordered to withdraw to their bases. Despite the fact that Ceausescu, the supreme commander by law, took direct control of the army at 9 AM on December 22, General Stanculescu ordered the army to stand down at 11 AM. That allowed the revolutionaries to occupy the television and start broadcasting what they pleased throughout the country. Moreover, at 2 PM Stanculescu ordered the Army to protect the revolutionary-controlled TV station, the Radio station, the Telecommunications' Palace and other strategic sites. At 3 PM the country's supreme commander was "arrested" in a military base. That very evening Ion Iliescu appeared on TV and announced the creation of a new political structure - the National Salvation Front.

So what happened IMO was that a popular revolt was more or less naturally "sparked" and was then used by elements of the regime to stage a coup and then to give power over to an already formed political structure.

O.K. I get it.

But......so who was doing all the shooting? die hard securitate?

My understanding is that In Timisaura people were mowed down. And in your own fair city, i heard that the "Battle of Bucaharest went on for three days! I saw for myself the sidewalk memorials of places where people were shot down.

That "protected" T.V. station was the site of one of fiercest battles of all, I've read. Even broadcasting while there was gunfire inside the building!

Obviously there were some people who hadn't heard it was a "done deal" if that's your implication.

I hope you are not minimizing the incredible courage that your countrymen and women showed at the time!

Say what you will; the footage of Ceausescu up on that roof, fully expecting to harangue the mutineers, and then standing there in shock as the thousands jeered him down and out is one of history's great moments, showing the power of people, imo. (hello Iran today!?)

Yah, I know the revolution got sidetracked later....but that doesn't diminish the events of those days in December, 1989. You guys, should be lighting a candle for those heroes imo, if you haven't already. I know I did.

I know two brothers who were serving in the army during the "revolution".
After they finally came home,and told each other about their "adventures" something funny came up:
One of them was charging with his platoon a certain building in Buc.They were ordered to do so,since "there were terorists inside".
The other brother was inside exactly in the same bulding "defending it at all costs " and were told that "terorists are attacking".
Bouth soldiers (defenders and attackers) suffered heavy losses.
I quess this answers some questions.

Before December 22 the regime was doing the shooting. There were 155 killed and 1,107 injured in the regime's crackdown. But 949 people were killed and 2,245 were injured after Ceausescu was isolated on December 22. Confusion and panic were deliberately created by the new "leaders" by issuing conflicting orders to army units, by spreading rumors through the TV and by handing out weapons to civilians and calling them out into the streets to "defend" sites that were already defended by the army.

In my personal view 1989 was for Romania's history a kind of 1944 if you know what I mean. We lost two costly wars and we switched sides through two coups. Antonescu and Ceausescu paid with their lives, the country went through bad periods of economic and social "re-adjustment". Let's see if our current alliance survives its series of present and future wars.

In case of war, there were several layers of defense. First it was the regular army, then troops of interior, patriotic guards and the last, there were special troops of resistance, specially trained for urban and guerrilla warfare. Those troops were recruited from all branches of the military and had special training abroad. Every year or so they were called for so called "vacation" but they were forbidden to take their families with them. In case of war, they had to act in cells independently one from another, and were activated by special codes "packed" in messages send through mass-media (radio, television etc). Those were the troops that did the shooting after 22 December, the so called "terrorists". Many of them were caught, but all of them were released in January 1941.

Of course, there were the tragic cases of regular military shooting at each other, the most notable example being at Otopeni, due to confusion and fear. I don't think that it was a deliberate move, you have to consider that most of the army regulars were drafted guys, poorly trained and poorly motivated (during 2 years of service they were shooting 2-4 war cartridges for two times at the poligon, the rest of the time they were working in crop fields, mines and other patriotic duties). Another example of poor coordination happened at Buzau, a city with many military units. My father was at an aviation unit (choppers and transport airplanes) that was next to a map-making unit (geodezi). A car full of civilians had to pass in front of these units, but due to general confusion, the order was not passed to the next unit, and the car was filled with bullets (all civilians were killed).

There was an electronic war going on, they were receiving false targets on radars, and they were hearing on radios guys speaking in Arabic. Someone with knowledge of their equipment (which was of Soviet origin) were jamming them. They received an alert of a column of terrorist approaching the airfield in trucks, and two fighters were scrambled. Only by luck they managed not to bomb one of their own radio stations, because they saw some trucks and they took them for the "terrorists".

The stories about those cells being the terrorists were published in the journals owned by Voiculescu (aka "Felix the fat cat") who was among those who gorged on Ceausescu's bank accounts after 1989. I find them kind of shallow because what the journalists did was take some Army's Publishing House books on people's war strategy and tactics and tried to stretch them into the terrorists' blueprints in 1989. But it makes no sense at all. Apart from random sniping and small arms fire, what did these awesomely trained cells do? What site did they take, what major point did they sabotage, what revolutionary leader did they kill, what political manifestos did they spread, what resistance did they form? None, nothing.

The stories about those cells being the terrorists were published in the journals owned by Voiculescu (aka "Felix the fat cat") who was among those who gorged on Ceausescu's bank accounts after 1989. I find them kind of shallow because what the journalists did was take some Army's Publishing House books on people's war strategy and tactics and tried to stretch them into the terrorists' blueprints in 1989. But it makes no sense at all. Apart from random sniping and small arms fire, what did these awesomely trained cells do? What site did they take, what major point did they sabotage, what revolutionary leader did they kill, what political manifestos did they spread, what resistance did they form? None, nothing.

I didn't take them form Jurnalul (I don't even read it), but they were presented by an officer in a short documentary about the events of 89. And yes, all they did was harassing small arms fire. This kind of harassing fire started after December 22 and suddenly stopped with the execution of Ceausescu. About what side did they take, it was the side of those who were taking the power.

You can download here an interesting documentary of about 30 minutes, that was aired on TVR2

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3629091/TC.m4v.zip

http://www.netdrive.ws/267984.html

Well, there's an analogy I certainly never thought of. (1944/1989)!!

Interesting. Yeah; you guys have been jerked around more than any THREE countries I can think of.

(Where did it all go off the rails postwar, in your opinion? Was Gheorghiu-Dej as bad/better/worse as the C's?...I know the whole collectivization thing got going with him...)



I hear you on the rest....but aren't you repeating the basic conspiracy theory that c2 posted to start this thread? (nice to see you two agreeing on something, btw, lol).

cheers. Happy new Year! Watch out for the fireworks.
cnfb