Russian-Romanian conflict, in Moldova/Transdniester

Let me give you a counterexample:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War

80.000 russians aganist 22.000 chechens, so almost 4 to 1 ratio.
Air attacks started late august 1999, ground attack started beginning of october 1999, lasted until april 2000. Again, fought against an adversary without air force and significant antiaircraft missile forces. And direct land border, allowing to move their forces at will.

Russians ground forces are at 395.000 personel (2006 estimate). So, they will have to move one quarter to one third of their army from all over the russian teritory at the border of Romania (which has no direct border with Russia), including tanks, APC, fuel etc. without being detected, and then hapily fighting for weeks/months without caring about what NATO and UE have to say.

Russians didn`t atack Romania even in 1968, when they were provoked in worst mode posible. In theory, it could be done, IF you have land acces (that is if the ukrainians agree), but it is just too costly, both military and political. And beside external damage, there are some muslim separatist movements in the asian side of Russia who would hapily resume their atacks if the troups in their area are left (Daghestan, Chechenia etc.).

This post has been edited by Hadrian on July 05, 2012 10:42 pm

This thread should have stayed closed forever. What a waste of bandwidth and storage!
Radu

I think the author of the article (Eduard Ovidiu Ohanesian) is one of the three journalists abducted in Iraq, in that controversial episode, several years ago.

You're right Agarici, he is one of the three abducted in Iraq!
Even if the article itself can be questioned, the precarious state of the Romanian army today is real, fact well known in military environment.

Oh, c'mon, the article is highly irrelevant and it "discloses" some skeletons in the closet of our dearest Army. It's a little like in that joke with the officer that was arrested after publicly stating his chief was an idiot: he was guilty of disclosing a secret of state!
We do not have the capacity of standing alone in front of the USSR (no mistake here) and that's the very reason for which we're in the NATO! Logical?
As for Mr. Ohanesian's connections with the "blue-eyed guys", we should leave it like that until we can prove anything!

Based on previous recent events (georgian war, second chechen war), you can quite reliably predict similar future events.
And for the panicard title (Romania occupied in less than one day), you can just ask a truck driver if he can traverse Romania from Constanta to the western border in less than one day. He will tell you it takes him so much time to traverse Romania as to reach Germany on hungarian and austrian motorways.

Now think several hundred tanks and several thousend truck trying to do the same thing. Even without any oposition, I don`t think you can do it. Just the infrastructure of Romania does not allow it.
Every man who tryed to go from western Romania to the Black sea in vacation can tell it...

Don't forget the para-troopers and the "Fifth column"...
I suppose the air above Romania doesn't have "extra holes", such as the roads!

Indeed they could be used to ocupy key points (bridges over Danube, airports), but you cannot ocupy the whole coutry with them. If it was that simple, Russia would have used them in Georgia and Chechenia.

Well, perhaps they simply do not have that many qualified paratroopers; perhaps they never really wanted to completely occupy Georgia, but to teach them a lesson (and NATO, for that matter).
But that's wild goose chase!