What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

What Russian pressure? Tell me one thing Russia has pressured Romania with.

The spy affair? The declarations re: Moldavia/Transnistria? The ever-growing gas price? Dunno...

Those are not pressures. And the gas price will be growing at European Commission pressure (real pressure):

http://economie.hotnews.ro/stiri-energie-6...-din-europa.htm

http://www.evz.ro/detalii/stiri/comisia-eu...gie-907422.html

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/ar...s/20101007.aspx

Yes, we could, and it was the right moment, if we would have the right leaders.
I am assuming that we would have to pass under all kind of pressure, economical and political, but I doubt Russia would do a direct military action like they did in Georgia. First of all, they would have to pass through Ukraine, and the Ukrainians hate Russia much more than Poland or Romania.
If that union would happen in August or early September 1991, we may or may not be in NATO now, but definitely the European Union would not accept us as member.

This post has been edited by Florin on October 11, 2010 09:01 pm

I am a very curious how George Friedman reached the conclusion that "Statele Unite vor cunoaşte o nouă epocă de aur în cea de-a doua jumătate a secolului XXI." / "The United States will enjoy a new golden era in the second half of the XXIst century." I took this quote from the link provided at the start of the topic.
No additional comments for now.

Now I realised that what Mr. Bogatu says about the possible Bessarabia-Romania union was once said by Stalin about Germany: out of NATO, neutral, but reunited!
The result: they waited 40 more years and did it in their own terms!

You may read the book. It is very interesting, and full of economics, history, demogrphics, politics, etc, and he made every conclusion based on geopolitical facts. If you don't read the book, no one can explain you every detail.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/ar...s/20101019.aspx

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htecm/art...s/20101017.aspx

Yeah, well, they seem to have money for re-arming; funny (and not so much, though) is that many countries are willing to sell what seems to be rather "new" technology to a potential enemy!

There is not the first time when French was "perfide", M.
Remember XVIth century, when Turks under Soliman the Magnificient were at their top power. Europe has no solution against them. France was in war with Spain, and made an alliance with Turks, and Turkish fleet arrived in Marseille without any fight. France betrayed Europe for one advantage against Spain. Now, France do the same with NATO, i think.
Remember, Lenin said that "the capitalists will sell us the rope that we will use to hang them".

Oh, I know that pretty well, but I thought today was different; don't know why...
Realpolitik (German term); "balance of forces" (English concept); "întoarcerea armelor" aka "changing sides"...
OoT (maybe): the Romanian policy towards the Warsaw Pact was different from the France-NATO issue? WAS IT?

Europe was nothing but a bunch of kingdoms with conflicting interests and enmities. There was nothing to "betray". France pursued its own interests, as it was normal for it to do and as all others were doing.

You forgot raison d'etat, MMM.

"Europe", i.e. the HRE didn't really care. Charles V. fought with Francis over Italy. that was the focus.

Indeed, but they were CHRISTIANS!!!!!