First Bf-109 in Romania

Romania ordered 50 Bf 109 E. Some were delivered in the spring of 1940 and the rest arrived in the spring of 1941. This one-year lapse does not indicate any significant "favouritism" to me.
Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on September 19, 2013 11:32 am

I am surprised by your conclusion.
50 Bf 109E vs. nothing (or 30 He 112 vs. 3, or 32 He 111 vs. 2) is a significant difference.
Without Berlin's directions and approval things were different (money talks being the norm, as in regular business).

Gen. Dénes

I would not use the "who got stuff" yardstick to "measure" whether Berlin "liked" Romania or Hungary more. Yeah, Berlin gave Romania some Messerschmitts but it was the same Berlin that gave Hungary Ruthenia or Transylvania. Romanians would have gladly swapped. On balance, Hungary gained more from Berlin. Everything Romania got from Berlin, they had to pay hard or fight hard for it.
I still believe that Hungarian Messerschmitts have no place in this discussion.
Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on September 19, 2013 12:56 pm

Florin, why don't you document yourself properly before asking questions?

If Yugoslavia signed the Tripartite Pact on 25 March 1941 and was already attacked by Germany already on 6 April 1941, how do you think in the 11 days between the two event Belgrade was "promised" Bf 109Es, the contract signed, the payment done and the delivery completed?

Gen. Dénes

P.S. I decided not to react to your provocation in another thread regarding John Hunyadi (according to you "Iancu of Huneadoara", a nonsense, only because the English version sounded too Hungarian), but this one I could not overview.

When that could happen? When Dragiša Cvetković, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, went to Vienna to sign the treaty on March 25.
This is what I thought. I understand that I am wrong, but my words could be a "provocation" that you "could not overview" only for you.

PS: I read the messages, but I think I did not miss a possible answer to my question regarding the date when Hungary requested for the first time to receive Me-109's.

This post has been edited by Florin on September 19, 2013 01:09 pm

OT. Please put the facts straight of this delicate topic.
It wasn't Berlin, who "gave Hungary (...) Transylvania" as a gift, or a bargain. It was rather Berlin and Rome, who were asked jointly by Rumania and Hungary to arbitrate their dispute over Transylvania, in order to avoid war. Then it was decided by Germany and Italy, at Vienna, that Rumania can keep the larger part (South), while the smaller part (North) would return to Hungary. These are the historical facts. The rest is politics and spin. But I agree, this is off topic. Let's keep it that way.

Returning to the deal of Messerschmitt fighters, one cannot brush aside the issue with the casual note: "Berlin gave Romania some Messerschmitts". No, it was, as I said: 50 Bf 109E vs. nothing, 30 He 112 vs. 3, and 32 He 111 vs. 2. A significant difference and a clear signal of who was more important in Berlin's eyes in those days. This is the only point I wanted to make, nothing else.

Gen. Dénes

Unlike Hungary, Romania and Finland took part to the war with U.S.S.R. from the very first day - June 22, 1941.
Romania was at the edge of Hitler's empire.
Even the "friendly" Yugoslavia could be considered at the edge of his empire - with Italy carrying an unsuccessful war against Greece, and the British still undefeated in North Africa.
Hungary was in the interior of this empire.
Now give me a good argument why Hungary should get priority in deliveries, and more quantity of equipment, as long her security was automatically guaranteed by both the Reich and Italy, in any problem Hungary may have with Romania.

This post has been edited by Florin on September 19, 2013 04:21 pm

Denes, whichever way you want to put this, Messerschmitts for Romania has NOTHING to do with Messerschmitts for Hungary. It would belong here only if the Messerschmitts that Romania got were initially destined for Hungary. But there is absolutely no link.

Yeah, Romania ordered 50 Messerschmitts, but 11 arrived in May 1940. Then Romania was raped with Germany's say-so in June 1940 (hint: Ribbentrop WAS German) then raped again with what you call "Germany's arbitration" in August 1940. The rest of the Messerschmitts arrived in January 1941. Just what part of all "that" says "Germany really loved Romania"? If Germany cared so much for Romania and all of the above happend, I wonder what would have happened if they hated Romania...

Hungary still got their Messerschmitts and Heinkels eventually.

Radu

Easy. Germany would have occupied Rumania, just like it did with Hungary in March 1944. But you know, in history there are no what-ifs. And this is off topic, too.

Returning to the Messerschmitt '109s, Germany did not sell any He 112s, except for the 3 aforementioned ones (the ones eyemarked for Hungary were eventually sold to Rumania), and no Bf 109Gs were sold either. Hungary received-to-own the Bf 109Gs from its own licence production.

But let's return to the original topic and the reasons why Rumania received its Bf 109Es.

Gen. Dénes

P.S. You cannot call "rape" an act you've asked for...

This post has been edited by Dénes on September 19, 2013 06:24 pm

OFF-TOPIC:

They surely did not ask for the Soviet ultimatum. As (here we go again) for the Vienna "arbitration", Manoilescu (the Romanian foreign affairs minister) and trough him king Carol clearly and oficially specified that there was no such a thing as a call for arbitration from Romania. Hence, this was one of the first thing expressed by Manoilescu in his meeting with Ribbentrop, the later reply being that "this is not the main point in discussion here". The fact appears in their memoirs and is confirmed by the inexistence of any Romanian official document calling for an arbitration. Moreover, as far as I recall, the entire ideea appeared only after Manoilescu and Teleki arrived at Vienna. The policy of the "fait accompli" wasn't something new for the Reich's government.

This post has been edited by Agarici on September 19, 2013 07:49 pm

On the same logic, Boemia and Moravia should have remained a protectorate, because the unfortunate Hacha „asked” the German troops to enter Cz. and „protect” it...
Romania was asked by Hitler to solve its problems with Hungary and Bulgaria. After failing the Turnu Severin talks - much to the fault of Hungarian „negotiators”, who knew they do not have to give way, and after Soviet Union was becoming even more menacing towards Romania (see border incidents, provocations, Danube European Comission etc.) and more promissing to Hungary (military talks and so on), then and only then did Hitler decide to „arbitrate” the ongoing feud. But I am sure you know that already...
Back on topic (which was „First BF-109 in Romania”), the Germans allowed as much as 50 planes being delivered to Romania, when they knew for sure that Romania will be the Southern wing of the Barbarossa; before that, 11 planes were not a „major” acquisition.
Fun fact: not even the German military attache in Romania, colonel Wahle, agreed with the arms deliveries to Romania, because „Romania was NOT a German-allied country”. In the end, though, he was right...

"In the end" - do you mean August 1944 ?

That would be more than 3 years later, after few hundred thousands of Romanian military personnel were killed or fell prisoners while fighting for Hitler's camp.
And almost one year earlier Italy had thrown the towel, Hungary tried to quit in the spring and got occupied, and Finland quitted the Axis in about the same moment with Romania - and they would do it regardless of what Romania would do.

This post has been edited by Florin on September 19, 2013 11:28 pm

OFF-TOPIC:

They surely did not ask for the Soviet ultimatum. As (here we go again) for the Vienna "arbitration", Manoilescu (the Romanian foreign affairs minister) and trough him king Carol clearly and oficially specified that there was no such a thing as a call for arbitration from Romania. Hence, this was one of the first thing expressed by Manoilescu in his meeting with Ribbentrop, the later reply being that "this is not the main point in discussion here". The fact appears in their memoirs and is confirmed by the inexistence of any Romanian official document calling for an arbitration. Moreover, as far as I recall, the entire ideea appeared only after Manoilescu and Teleki arrived at Vienna. The policy of the "fait accompli" wasn't something new for the Reich's government.

I heard that Manoilescu fainted and lost his conscience when he saw the final map pushed to him to accept at Vienna on August 30.
Is this confirmed by serious sources ?

Yes it is, Florin. In his own memoires, by Valer Pop (the second Romanian envoy to Vienna) and - if I'm not mistaking - by count Ciano himself. It happened when he saw the map and realized that Cluj was given to Hungary. He fell inert on the floor, or on the table where the map was, making a loud noise. Ribbentrop sent one of his aides to bring a glass of water - which he did, precipitating himself outside the room, among the journalists - and then his personal doctor was sent to take care of Manoilescu. He was reportedly in a state of prostration, with a very low blood pressure.

This post has been edited by Agarici on September 20, 2013 07:51 pm

Please return to the initial topic. I am pretty sure that there are already several open threads specifically dedicated to the events in June-August 1940.

No, I was referring stricto sensu to the fact that Romania signed the Tri-partite pact on 23.11.1940 and that is the date of the first official document linking Romania and Germany. Wahle had said these things at least beginning in march 1939 (Wohlthat).
Anyway, what I said can be applied as well to the post-23.08.1944.