Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (6) [1] 2 3 ... Last »  ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Romanian contribution to the shortening of the war
Paulus
Posted: August 27, 2003 11:42 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 15
Member No.: 89
Joined: August 26, 2003



Just about the Romanian switching of side, I've read in a book that the war would have been at least 6 months longer if Romanian troops continued the battle against the Soviets, and I'm quite sure this would have been, as far as Axis still had lots of Oil and Industry capacities in Romania and Hungary, who were immediately threatened and loosed afted September ...

However they were still considered as a looser (as the Axis side) country at the end of the war ...
PMUsers WebsiteAOL
Top
C-2
Posted: August 27, 2003 07:10 pm
Quote Post


General Medic
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 2453
Member No.: 19
Joined: June 23, 2003



I'd say 6 weeks not months!
PMUsers Website
Top
Dénes
Posted: August 28, 2003 12:53 pm
Quote Post


Host
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 4348
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



QUOTE
Just about the Romanian switching of side, I've read in a book that the war would have been at least 6 months longer if Romanian troops continued the battle against the Soviets, and I'm quite sure this would have been...

That's the official point of view of Rumanian historiography, intended to boost the importance of the Rumanian about-face. However, if one seriously weighs the actual situation of the German forces in South-Eastern Europe in late August 1944, can easily reach the same conclusion that 'Dr. C-2' reached, namely that the war would have been longer not 6 months but 6 weeks, the most.
The most important defece line that would somewhat delay the Red Army's advance would have been the Carpathians, which could have been defended by a joint German-Rumanian-Hungarian force. However, this did not happen due to the coup of Aug. 23. Therefore, the Soviets could easily penetrate the Carpathians with the help of Rumanian soldiers and local Rumanians.

Dénes
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
dragos
Posted: August 29, 2003 08:21 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



I believe the Romania's changing of sides had a stronger influence in the shortening of the war. The prompt opening of the Focsani "gate" cleared the way to the central and southern sectors of the eastern front. The following advance was one of the fastest in the history of ww2: between 200 and 700 km in two weeks. Otherwise, even if Focsani "gate" was forced sooner or later by the Soviets, the Axis troops defending the Transylvanian perimeter would have been prepared for a better defense. So I go for somewhere between 6 weeks and 6 months.
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
mars
Posted: August 29, 2003 02:00 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 43
Member No.: 70
Joined: August 05, 2003



I do not mean any dis-respect to those brave Rumanian soldiers, but I have to say for Soviet red army, the Rumania-Transylvanian -Hungary-Austria was only a secondary-rate direction. Just remember that at the direction (Warsaw-Berlin), each Soviet Red army Front had 2 tank army, each had at least 3 sometimes 4 tank/Mechanic Corps, about 700-900 most modern Russian tanks. At Rumania-Hungary direction, 2 Soviet Front together only had 1 tank army, which only had 2 tank/Mechani Corps, 50% of them were lend-lease American tanks
PM
Top
Geto-Dacul
Posted: August 29, 2003 03:41 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier adjutant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Member No.: 9
Joined: June 18, 2003



mars wrote :

QUOTE
but I have to say for Soviet red army, the Rumania-Transylvanian -Hungary-Austria was only a secondary-rate direction.


Think so? In 1944-45, it was a race between the US and Soviets for influence in Europe. Taking Berlin was only a matter of time... Consolidating Soviet Union's positions in the Balkans was of the greatest importance, because it was part of the Russian imperialist dream of controling the Danube, and the straits.

QUOTE
Just remember that at the direction (Warsaw-Berlin), each Soviet Red army Front had 2 tank army, each had at least 3 sometimes 4 tank/Mechanic Corps, about 700-900 most modern Russian tanks.


The Axis forces of Romania & Balkans were not of the importance of those defending the gateway to Berlin.
PMUsers Website
Top
Paulus
Posted: September 03, 2003 01:02 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 15
Member No.: 89
Joined: August 26, 2003



If Romanian army fought bravely some months more (suppose January 1945) I think the Reds Wouldn't have avdanced more than southern part of Romania and would have taken serious losses.
I think Romania's army was still a powerful element of Axis forces, it had an important number of soldiers, am I wrong ?
So when the Germans lost all those divisions, they probably had another big lack of troops for the continuation of the war, besides numerous romanian divisions were now fighting 'em ...
PMUsers WebsiteAOL
Top
C-2
Posted: September 03, 2003 06:03 pm
Quote Post


General Medic
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 2453
Member No.: 19
Joined: June 23, 2003



In 44 many Romanians had enough of the war.Especialy after Stalingrad.
They felt it's not their war.And they were forced in it.
It was imposible to hold on ,especialy with the USAF bombing!
Glad you like the site!
PMUsers Website
Top
inahurry
Posted: September 06, 2003 02:28 am
Quote Post


Sergent
Group Icon

Group: Banned
Posts: 191
Member No.: 61
Joined: July 28, 2003



Hmmm, and I thought (I didn't but let's pretend I did) this site could allow some Romanian historiography information to be accesed by other than Romanians and maybe those can judge by themselves. Guess the Hungarian vigilance never ends. Anyway, the "6 months" was a statement first made in the west, "hot", right after August 23, 1944. [ I forgot, there's always Boia (Lucian nu ardei), when is he going to "de-myth-ize (or how's spelled) the Romanian participation in WW2? ]
PM
Top
dragos
Posted: September 06, 2003 09:55 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE
Anyway, the \"6 months\" was a statement first made in the west, \"hot\", right after August 23, 1944.


It was France, I believe, on a radio broadcast.
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Victor
Posted: September 06, 2003 10:05 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4332
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



It was radio station Paris and the message was:
France considers that the Romanian contribution made the war 6 months shorter
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Paulus
Posted: September 06, 2003 08:06 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 15
Member No.: 89
Joined: August 26, 2003



What revolted me most is that Romania was treated if it was one of the countries who lost the war ... isn't it right ?

However, in which proportions did romanian sldiers were motivated for the war to the West ?
PMUsers WebsiteAOL
Top
C-2
Posted: September 06, 2003 09:45 pm
Quote Post


General Medic
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 2453
Member No.: 19
Joined: June 23, 2003



At the first part of the campain ,motivation was high.
There were Basarabia and Bucovina,which were taken after the Ribent.-molot. pact.
After it there were voices which asked not to cont.the campain far into Russia,but the army was still motivated and moral was high.
The decline came after Stalingrad,and as the losses became enorm and the front line was coming toward the Romanian borders ,teh soldiers felt they are involved in a war that wasn't theirs.
So many felt that the 23/8/44 came as a miracle since all expected an unconditional surrender in the next few Weeks/months...
PMUsers Website
Top
Victor
Posted: September 07, 2003 06:44 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4332
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



Paulus was asking about the anti-Axis campaign. He said West, you know, where Hungary, Slovakia and Austria are.

During the fights in Transylvania motivation was high, but after that it started to decline, as they got further and further from home and as the Red Army treated them more badly. How would you feel if you knew that your "ally" is taking away your supplies and even your victories (see Budapest for example)?
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Paulus
Posted: September 07, 2003 08:27 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 15
Member No.: 89
Joined: August 26, 2003



QUOTE
Paulus was asking about the anti-Axis campaign. He said West, you know, where Hungary, Slovakia and Austria are.  


I was interested by both posts :wink:

In effect, I've heard about problems with the Red Army ...
When I read articles about the campaign to the west in the ancient website I saw they (romanian force) also took as heavy losses as they took on the East ... Am I right ?
PMUsers WebsiteAOL
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (6) [1] 2 3 ... Last » Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0316 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]