No I don’t - you are right. I was just trying to use Romania as a (bad) example.
The official Siamese line now, is that they permitted the Nips to transit their country rather than subjecting the ‘Land of the Welcoming Smile*’ to the ravages of war.
- = which these days is famous for being vertical.
Naughty naughty Cuts, Speaking from experience? 
How did you get a British rank? I want one.
Ref the Thais, don’t for one minute think they like the Japanese, they still hate them today. As I found out when I visited there a few years back.
Off topic: Egorka, did your grandfather remeber the incidents occured on the occupying of Odessa (huge explosion on the Romanian 10th infantry division HQ and reprisals afterwards?
On topic: As for arhob’s example, he used a bad one. Romania is the only country who fought on the Axis side and on the Allied side afterwards.
The reasons were simple: fought for regaining the lost territories. In 1940, Romania as a traditional ally of the France and the British Empire, lost Bessarabia to the Soviet Union (as a consequence of Ribbentrop-Molotov pact), south of Dobrudja to the Bulgaria and northern part of Transylvania (as a consequence of the Vienna “arbitration”) to the Hungary.
Surrounded by the very hostile forces, Romania’s aims were:
a) to preserve his status as a country (avoiding dismantling like in Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland, Yugoslavia’s cases)’
b) to regain its lost territories.
So, Romania joined the Axis club for regaing Bessarabia). It was a huge debate in Romania if the Romanian army should cross the Dniester (the eastern border of Bessarabia) or should remain within the regained boundaries. Antonescu said at that time: “We will fight together with our German allies against the bolshevik monster to the end”.
In 1944, another turnpoint happened. For 2 years Romania tried to discuss with the Allies in Stockholm and Cairo its surrendering condition. Soviet Union blocked that with its total capitulation clause. As a result, the young King Michael overthrone Antonescu and declared war on the Axis, liberating with Romanian army the whole Romanian territories, providing a full access of the Soviet forces to the Danube into the Balkan areas. After that King Michael sent the Romanian army to fight together with Soviet Army liberating Hungary, Czechoslovakia and parts of Austria. As a result (the Romanian Army was the fourth in strength fighting on Aliied side), at the peace conference, Romania was denied the status of co-beligerant, but regained Transylvanian territories lost to Hungary back in 1940.
As for the other lost territories, south of Dobrudja is now part of Bulgaria (Romania occupied that territory in 1911 as a result of the Balkan wars) and Bessarabia is now mostly the Republic of Moldova. part of it are still parts of actual Ukraine as Stalin ordered in the 50s.
Off topic: Egorka, did your grandfather remeber the incidents occured on the occupying of Odessa (huge explosion on the Romanian 10th infantry division HQ and reprisals afterwards?
I will look in to my Grand Dads memoirs. It will take some time.
Thanks mate!
Hello our friend Dany;)
You’ve back , what’s a pleasant new.
Sorry mate but Romanian aim was not just fough for lost territories. Hitler promised them the Odessa and south of Ukraine lands as the compensation for the “support” ( except of Crimea).
Hering, however, wanted to know, what territories were promissed to the allies of Germany. Hitler frowned eyebrows. It it did not be desirable to be inferior anything. It seemed it that in it this they steal. "nothing determined not opromised either Slovaks or Hungarians nor Turks.
Antonescu declares claim in Besarabiyu and Odessa. Our relations with Rumania are good, but no one can know future and we must not prematurely plan boundaries.
Finns want eastern Karelia, but they will not obtain Kola peninsula, which we leave to ourselves. They also require Leningrad region: I will lay to the base Leningrad and will return to them territory ".And it added, as if dreaming:
“I will make from the conquered countries terrestrial paradise”.
Raimond Kartie . Mystery of WW2:Nurnbergs materials . 1948
http://www.rus-sky.org/history/library/kartye.htm
Antonescu wish the Odessa for itself. Nice battle for lost territories - don’t you think;)?
Surrounded by the very hostile forces, Romania’s aims were:
a) to preserve his status as a country (avoiding dismantling like in Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland, Yugoslavia’s cases)’
b) to regain its lost territories.
Ukrainian Odessa and Moldavia ?!!
So, Romania joined the Axis club for regaing Bessarabia). It was a huge debate in Romania if the Romanian army should cross the Dniester (the eastern border of Bessarabia) or should remain within the regained boundaries. Antonescu said at that time: “We will fight together with our German allies against the bolshevik monster to the end”.
And we will exterminate the jews and whole another nations to the last one together with Germans.
In 1944, another turnpoint happened. For 2 years Romania tried to discuss with the Allies in Stockholm and Cairo its surrendering condition. Soviet Union blocked that with its total capitulation clause. As a result, the young King Michael overthrone Antonescu and declared war on the Axis, liberating with Romanian army the whole Romanian territories, providing a full access of the Soviet forces to the Danube into the Balkan areas. After that King Michael sent the Romanian army to fight together with Soviet Army liberating Hungary, Czechoslovakia and parts of Austria.
You wish to say "Romanian army helped the Red Army to CAPTURE the rest Eastern Europe Yea we know it already.
As a result (the Romanian Army was the fourth in strength fighting on Aliied side), at the peace conference, Romania was denied the status of co-beligerant, but regained Transylvanian territories lost to Hungary back in 1940.
Hey mate i heared the Polish army was the fourth in strength fighting on Aliied side.
Where is the disparity here? Do you wish to insult our polish friends 
As for the other lost territories, south of Dobrudja is now part of Bulgaria (Romania occupied that territory in 1911 as a result of the Balkan wars) and Bessarabia is now mostly the Republic of Moldova. part of it are still parts of actual Ukraine as Stalin ordered in the 50s.
It so sorry for romanians but the repablic of Moldova is independent state nowadays as we know.
P.S.Just don’t think i wish to touch your national feeling mate. But…do not think you too romantic about participation of Romania in WW2.
Off-topic: Pointless, Chevan…
Simply not true. Anyway, think whatever you want.
For Odessa see above. For Ukrainian “Moldavia” I wrote
It was a huge debate in Romania if the Romanian army should cross the Dniester (the eastern border of Bessarabia) or should remain within the regained boundaries.
My bold.
Issue already discussed. No need to polute this topic as well.
I heard otherwise. Anyway, re-read Arhob’s, Egorka’s and my posts.
Did I claimed otherwise??
None were taken, Chevan. I only presented the facts as a reply to Arhob.
What is the pointless Dany?
Simply not true. Anyway, think whatever you want.
Oh yea the fact that the Antonescu wished to captured Odessa is simply “not true”.
I/ve give you the source , now could you give us the refutation.
For Odessa see above. For Ukrainian “Moldavia” I wrote My bold.
It was a huge debate in Romania if the Romanian army should cross the Dniester (the eastern border of Bessarabia) or should remain within the regained boundaries
So what was resault?. Did the “debates” helped the Romanian army to stop in the Dniester?
I think the Hitler did not like any idea of “debates”.
Issue already discussed. No need to polute this topic as well.
Sorry mate. As youu wish.
I heard otherwise. Anyway, re-read Arhob’s, Egorka’s and my posts.
The posts have readed - the question is still?
Who was the fourth army in coalition?
Did I claimed otherwise??
None were taken, Chevan. I only presented the facts as a reply to Arhob.
Yes Dany. But the way of your representation ofRomanian participation in the side of Nazy ( firght for the lost territories) is the a little uncorrect IMO.
Anyway cheers.
Off-topic:
On 27 July 1941, Hitler sent a letter to general Antonescu (he was promoted marshal a month later), in which he asked for the further cooperation of the Romanian troops beyond the Dniester River and the Romanian administration of the territory between the Dniester and the Bug rivers. Antonescu accepted on 31 July. In fact the 3rd Army had already crossed the river on 17 July.
http://www.worldwar2.ro/operatii/?article=7
Edited: My bold.
Again and again off-topic:
Mark Axworthy (Third Axis, Fourth Ally - Romanian Armed Forces in the European War 1941-1945, London 1995 ISBN 1-85409-267-7)
The title of this book refers to the fact that Romania was not only the third Axis power in the European war, but fielded the fourth largest Allied army in 1944 –45. Indeed, in 1943-44 it was the second Axis power on the continent and in 1944 –45 it suffered the third-highest Allied casualties.
http://www.battlefront.co.nz/Article.asp?ArticleID=1111
…and incidentally, I have this quite expensive book.
Edited: See also teh reviews on http://www.amazon.com/Third-Axis-Fourth-Ally-1941-1945/dp/1854092677/ref=sr_1_3/103-3300743-7063811?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174916398&sr=1-3
Now please back on topic.
OK mate
So the Antonescu desided to join the Barbarossa and invide the Ukraine voluntary.
What for?Wat was the reason ?
May be Hitler promised him the lands of Ukraine as the “payment” for the romanian deads in Stalingrad?
OFF-topic again
Thanks Dany but the poles have another point
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/russia/newsid_4643000/4643217.stm
president of Poland Kvasnevskiy arrived to Moscow on 9 May, although it cost it the large labor to hold in control strong pressure of the enemies of this visit to Poland. After returning home, it underwent an even sharper criticism because President Putin in his speech over Red Square did not mention Poland in the number of allies, who conquered Fascist Germany, although the Polish subdivisions, which entered into the troops of Great Britain and USSR, composed the fourth in the value army, which was battling himself against the Germans.
…
http://lenta.ru/news/2005/05/03/yaruzelsky/
81 years old polish ex-minister of defency Yaruzelskiy reminded journalists that the Polish army was the fourth in the value in the anti-Hitler coalition and only army, besides Soviet, whose banners in 1945 fluttered above the ruins of Berlin
It’s obvious mate the polish politics has own version of “who was the fourth army of allies”
So where is the true?
Chevan and Dani
Polish politician in this case have right.
The ww2 in Europe wasn’t start in 1944-1945 but 1st september 1939 and the end was 8 may 1945.
The most important features of the Polish contribution to the defeat of Germany are determination and perseverance. Despite the severe defeat in 1939, the Poles formed five more armies, including four in exile: in France in 1939, in the United Kingdom in the summer of 1940 (after the defeat and capitulation of France), and twice in the USSR in 1941. These were the army of Gen. Anders that fought later in the South of Europe, and the one that emerged in 1943 and later fought at the Red Army’s side. The fifth Polish army, created at the end of September of 1939 was the conspiratorial armed force in the occupied territory. For the entire period of the war there also existed the very important “silent front” – the intelligence. Probably up to 2 millions Poles served since September 1st, 1939 to May 8th, 1945 in all the Polish military formations – regular armies, partisan troops and underground forces. In the final stage of war the Polish troops on all the European fronts amounted to some 600 000 soldiers (infantry, armored troops, aircraft and navy). In the summer of 1944, while commencing regular military struggle against the retreating Germans, the armed underground numbered more than 300 thousands sworn soldiers. It can be concluded that Poland put in the field the fourth greatest Allied army.
www.ww2.pl
Do you see Dany.
Due to our polish priend Polar we saw the 600 000 polish army really was the fourth army of coalition.
Cheers.
Bottom line, the main point in my posts is that Romania contribute more than the least belligerant at its war effort, on both Axis and Allied side.
… and I’m not mentioned the oil spared…
So, it’s time to move on on the topic.
Bad luck so far. I part of my Grand dad’d papers that I have with me does not cover that period.
I need to get hold od the first part first. I may be can get it in a month.
I will let you know.
Cпасибо!!
Dany did you mean the attack of Romanian HQ in Odessa 22 october 1941?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odessa_Massacre
One week later on October 22, a bomb detonated in the Romanian HQ, killing the Romanian commander, 16 officers, 9 non-commissioned officers and public servants, and 35 soldiers.
?
Yes, that’s it but I asked Egorka on particular memories.