3 ms·

Germany had complete control of the country. When Hitler decided to give Hungary a big chunk of Transylvania Romania army could not what they really wanted: ie

by dh2022 2y ago

Germany had complete control of the country. When Hitler decided to give Hungary a big chunk of Transylvania Romania army could not what they really wanted: ie fight the Hungarians. [0] Instead they had to suck it up and march East into Russia proper. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vienna_Award https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vienna_Award

the_af 2y ago
Germany did not have "complete control" of Romania. It was not a country under occupation. It was a willing ally, with a fascist dictator in charge: Antonescu. I think what you're describing is that Romania was not a peer on equal standing with Nazi Germany. Romanian troops took part, willingly, of Nazi death squad actions. Furthermore, Jews in Romania didn't remember the Germans "fondly".
- dh2022 2y ago
  You are saying that giving up a chunk of their territory because Germany told them so does not mean Romania was under Germany’s control. That is the quality of your post. Pretty much the same quality in everything else you wrote (like for example what you wrote about the Einsatzngruppen troops)
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    Alas, you are mistaken. Simply put: there's a huge difference between being outright conquered, occupied, and subject to the control of a puppet regime (like Poland, Ukraine, Greece), and the local regime proactively deciding to form an alliance (as did the governments of Hungary, Finland, and Romania). Even if that decision was made under a considerable degree of duress. That's just the basic storyline of the war. And it's all I have time for. But trust me, just take another look at the basic event chronology and you'll easily see why.
  - the_af 2y ago
    Yes, I'm saying that being forced to make concessions to a more powerful ally doesn't make them "entirely under the control of Germany". Furthermore, the loss of territory you mentioned was before the coup that put Antonescu in power and had Romania join the Axis. You wrote your initial comment stating a patent falsehood: that Romania was "basically under German occupation". It was under nothing of the sort. Their fascist dictatorship eagerly helped the Germans and it's officially considered part of the Axis (just not one of the major three powers). > (like for example what you wrote about the Einsatzngruppen troops) Romanian troops participated in the Odessa massacre and, as one of the Axis nations other than Germany most involved on the Eastern Front, participated in Einsatzkommando actions. And the point still stands: Romanian Jews certainly don't remember the Germans "fondly".

by dh2022 2y ago

the_af 2y ago

Germany did not have "complete control" of Romania. It was not a country under occupation. It was a willing ally, with a fascist dictator in charge: Antonescu. I think what you're describing is that Romania was not a peer on equal standing with Nazi Germany. Romanian troops took part, willingly, of Nazi death squad actions. Furthermore, Jews in Romania didn't remember the Germans "fondly".

dh2022 2y ago
You are saying that giving up a chunk of their territory because Germany told them so does not mean Romania was under Germany’s control. That is the quality of your post. Pretty much the same quality in everything else you wrote (like for example what you wrote about the Einsatzngruppen troops)
- aguaviva 2y ago
  Alas, you are mistaken. Simply put: there's a huge difference between being outright conquered, occupied, and subject to the control of a puppet regime (like Poland, Ukraine, Greece), and the local regime proactively deciding to form an alliance (as did the governments of Hungary, Finland, and Romania). Even if that decision was made under a considerable degree of duress. That's just the basic storyline of the war. And it's all I have time for. But trust me, just take another look at the basic event chronology and you'll easily see why.
- the_af 2y ago
  Yes, I'm saying that being forced to make concessions to a more powerful ally doesn't make them "entirely under the control of Germany". Furthermore, the loss of territory you mentioned was before the coup that put Antonescu in power and had Romania join the Axis. You wrote your initial comment stating a patent falsehood: that Romania was "basically under German occupation". It was under nothing of the sort. Their fascist dictatorship eagerly helped the Germans and it's officially considered part of the Axis (just not one of the major three powers). > (like for example what you wrote about the Einsatzngruppen troops) Romanian troops participated in the Odessa massacre and, as one of the Axis nations other than Germany most involved on the Eastern Front, participated in Einsatzkommando actions. And the point still stands: Romanian Jews certainly don't remember the Germans "fondly".