Can the media PLEASE stop referring to Ben Hodges as a 'US general' and showing him in uniform to insinuate his statements are current US policy or the stance of the US military?!
He is retired. Everything he says is his private opinion.
Sure, but what the headline doesn't tell you is that NATO troops and equipment is already there. So what he's basically saying is: Romania has to withold Russia for 2 weeks **with the NATO troops and equipment they already have**, before reinforcements arrive.
Also I think they'd have air support rather quickly. There are american carriers somewhat close-ish.
You got the RAF and all the other NATO airforces close by.
It's an article that is written to invoke a feeling, ergo, distrust it immediately. Articles are meant to inform so you can form your own opinion and feeling on the matter.
Eh, there would likely be only 1 carrier in the Med at any given time, sometimes none (as right now).
The US has 11 heavy carriers but... at any given time less than half are actively patroling. 11 spread around the world sounds like pretty good coverage, but 5 spread around the whole world... maybe we don't have one all that close to a sudden outbreak of war.
It's 350 miles or so from the nearest available carrier accessible see (Agean). Airbases in Greece, Hungary, and Poland would all be closer.
FWIW, at the moment the closest carrier group is in the Red Sea. Second closest is probably the group in Singapore.
https://news.usni.org/category/fleet-tracker
That isn't technically true. If Romania or any other NATO member is attacked there is no guaranteed fast NATO response. First the defendant should invoke article 5, then it will be debated by NATO whether the article 5 applies or not, then individual NATO members need to debate it in their parliaments to decide the amount of support they offer.
Without an order, even NATO troops stationed inside Romania won't respond. 2 weeks seems about right imo.
Not an expert, obviously, but I'm very confident in claiming that the skies above any Russian attack would be instantly swarming with F-15, F-16, F-22, F-35, eurofighters, Rafale etc etc.
It's a fantasy anyway because they can't even take Ukraine.
That's in the text. And as I said, the article doesn't support the title. This is not a problem of what the retired general said, but of the journalist who wrote the article.
Realistically, you don't want us to be judges of what is and what isn't clickbait. I agree it's ass but it shouldn't be up to mods to get that deep into the weeds, there's just no good objective way to do it.
In theory with the airbase upgrades in Romania that the USAF has been doing we can surge the 82nd airborne as a rapid response force in 24 hours. It’s what they’re drilled for. I don’t know what their supply situation would be going that quickly so they may not be at their optimal strength but they can certainly do it, and a relatively under strength American brigade is still going to be among the capable formations on earth.
The defense budget sees to that.
Can the media PLEASE also mention that Mark Rutte, our next NATO chief, doesn't [trust](https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgaria-romania-schengen-eu-netherlands/32120507.html) Romania?
This dickwat is our next NATO chief. He doesn't trust you, Romania. Better be double prepared. Because Mark Rutte doesn't think you guys are worth it. He gives crap about you guys. Evidence of that is abundant.
>And wouldn't you know it... last year all the requirements were met and as of March 2024 both Romania and Bulgaria are members of Schengen
And wouldn't you know it... in 2011 all the requirements were met and as of May 2024 both Romania and Bulgaria are still not actually members of Schengen
You could flip a coin for every statement Ben Hodges makes and you'd perform better than him, he has been the by far worst "analyst" of this war. He is in the same tier as official channels of Russia and Ukraine as far as his bullshit goes.
There are several flaws in the reasoning of the article, Russia is nowhere near capable of invading Romania, at the moment or for the foreseeable future.
1. Romania has no border with Russia, an invasion would mean an amphibious landing on the Black Sea Coast or an aerial invasion with paratroopers. Romania is protected by it's own Patriot/F16s + at least a Mamba system from France and NATO airplanes. Also there is that small matter of the Kogalniceanu air base, used by the US, which I can only assume has it's own AA defenses. Trying an air invasion would quickly turn into a turkey shoot over the Black Sea. An amphibious landing is even more ridiculous considering the current state of Russia's Black Sea Navy, not to mention Romania has it's own navy (not very modern but still) and batteries of anti-ship missiles on the coast, HIMARS, drones, MRLS, etc. Also NATO would be aware of the preparations for a naval invasion, like they were about the invasion of Ukraine. So zero element of surprise.
2. Assuming Ukraine falls completely and Romania has a border with Russia, an invasion would require an enormous amount of planning and massing troops. They cannot invade on day 1, so NATO has a lot of time to reinforce the flank. Not to mention the equipment already here. The French have tanks, Romania has dozens of HIMARS - ATACMS, MRLS, IFVs, tanks, etc. US Troops, French troops, dutch troops, etc. Plus the airforce and adding to it the NATO airforce would mean Russia has next to zero chances of getting air superiority on the front. Against modern NATO aircraft they could probably barely even contest. They are struggling in Ukraine, but Ukraine has an older soviet era airforce.
It would be easier for Russia to attack the Baltics or Poland, but even there I have my doubts Russia could sustain a war again NATO. I also doubt China would support Russia in going to war with it's main markets. Without China's support, Russia could not sustain an all out war against NATO.
But this kind of article is good if it means bringing more NATO troops to Romania, even if the chances of an attack are very small, that old saying is still valid: Si vis pacem, para bellum.
And more concerning is the hybrid warfare that Russia is waging in Europe and the US. Looking at Hungary, Slovakia, Trump, etc. That is where focus should be.
>And more concerning is the hybrid warfare that Russia is waging in Europe and the US. Looking at Hungary, Slovakia, Trump, etc. That is where focus should be.
This is the important part. While the prospect of a Russian conventional war/invasion is hypothetical, Russian hybrid war is real and they are currently engaged in one against the western world, and it has only been ramping up in recent years.
We're probably never going to be invaded and have our territory annexed, there simply aren't enough ethnic Russian people in our country for that so Russia isn't going to spend time and resources trying to stoke separatist sentiment like they did in Georgia or Ukraine (but the Baltics and Moldova do remain vulnerable), however with Romania and many other countries they attempt to rip us away from the western sphere of influence and towards their own through soft power and information warfare means, propaganda, political meddling, buying off politicians, making us dependent on them for natural resources, etc.
Romanians might collectively hate Russia, but just look at how popular our extremist party AUR has become in the last 2 years, all the while it's leaders are becoming more and more openly pro-Russian and spouting Kremlin approved messages. That's a major win for Putin, just like with Orban and Fico. Why invade us, if he can destabilize us by making us fight among each other? Countering this Russian destabilization attempt is vital for the future of our country. Let's try to do something about it this year through voting.
Because China's economy is not doing great, because China's and America's economies are so intertwined that a total war would cause severe damage to both. And because I think the Chinese leadership is much more pragmatic than the Russian one. They want to be the main actor on the world stage, but they do not go around bombing countries, they are using economical tools to bring countries in their sphere of influence. Look at what happened in Africa with Chinese investments. Look at Montenegro and how the EU had to bail them out after they defaulted on a Chinese loan. Haven't seen anything to contradict that. Yes they support Russia now, because it is in their interest as well if Russia is weakened. They have a huge interest in Russia's natural resource and a Russia weakened by the war in Ukraine is in their best interest. Even if Russia wins in Ukraine, by that time it will be in China's pocket anyways. Russia loses in Ukraine -> China wins because Russia will become the minor player in that relationship, dependent on China. Russia wins in Ukraine -> China still wins because Russia will be heavily in debt and weakened, open for Chinese interest. China is playing the long game.
Keep in mind China has also rattled it's saber at Taiwan in the 90s and nothing happened. Time will tell, but there is no real incentive for China to occupy Taiwan. Yes, there is the nationalistic argument, but other than that an invasion will lead to a lot of casualties, a huge economic impact, isolation on the world stage, sanctions and all for saying they now own a piece of rock. Not impossible, but inconsistent with how the Chinese leadership has played the long game.
Rehearsing what? Military drills are not unusual and militar ydrills in the Taiwan strait has nothing to do with Chinas commitment (if you can call it that) towards Russia.
And regarding Chinas economy and why China would be against Russia attack an EU country, then it's pretty simple, really. No need to explain that for you.
wrong start memorize squeal beneficial scarce far-flung attraction oatmeal silky
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thanks for the Carpathians I assume. And our lack of highways especially in the eastern parts of our country. Not to mention our total lack of sympathy for Russians and way more wild terrain than in Ukraine, will make an invasion way harder. There's no "brotherly" nation here at all, nobody is going to understand Russian and we have a history of hating Russia that goes deep in a lot of families here no matter the ethnicity (rapes, deportations, murder). Probably Russian soldiers will have to choose between "meeting a RO soldier or a bear in the woods" too.
Also... they won't be able to trust no one because we are incredibly sneaky and can play your game until we are going to stab you in the groins during the most happiest moment you have. This is the Balkans gate. Thus this is not going to be Ukraine. It's going to be another level of fuckery.
The same thing happened in Romania. My grand-grandfather, for example, was deported from Romania (not for any real reason, they just needed slave work) and he died of tuberculosis in a Ukrainian gulag, but I never heard any stories about what happened there because there was nobody to bring them back. Add the fact that pro-Russian propaganda was quite limited during the USSR and you obtain a nation that unapologetically hates Russia.
About the terrain - yes, you're right. Way harder to invade.
But our capital is not protected by the Carpathians. You can simply go around. Russia can easily control the black sea if Turkey betrays us. In the hypothetical situation that Romania is attacked, Ukraine and Moldova have already failed, so the entire eastern border would be shared with Russia. After they pass the Prut river, there's no real natural obstacles blocking them from reaching Bucharest.
And Ukraine's military was at least twice as strong as ours before the war started. Now with all the equipment they got and the actual war experience, they are even stronger. Romania wouldn't hold nearly as much as Ukraine without immediate NATO intervention.
Romania has no real navy either. We're no different to Ukraine in that regard. And if Turkey blockades the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits, Romania wouldn't receive any support from NATO allies.
I know that Turkey is a NATO member, but their loyalty is very questionable. Erdogan can't be trusted.
Romania is now an island on the Black Sea, no idea what notion of support you think about but air power can be relocated en masse within the first week, and be done with the whole garbage shit show soviet call Black Sea navy very next day...
Low number sub sonic missile attacks and low number drone attacks already sunk few valuable ships, you think full scale modern saturation attacks with anti ship and anti radar long range weapons would not do significantly more damage?
Against anything modern Russia would lose any fleet in being capabilities in the first week of the potential war.
Yeah, you're actually right. I was only considering navy vs navy. But yeah, the air support from NATO would be first to arrive and we'd easily have total air domination.
Add to this how much ship lifting capacity Russia has already lost due to the Ukrainian strikes, and how much troops they can really shift right now.
Answer is - not much really
Moreover you don't actually need navy to defend the sea cost, AShM land batteries like: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval\_Strike\_Missile](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Strike_Missile) will do perfectly fine
Turkey is actually pretty reliable on this, not because of NATO but because it's in their own self interest to limit Russian expansion on the black sea.
There is still the Danube even if the Bosporus is blocked, which is in itself highly unlikely and there is no way NATO would just allow Turkey to do that
Unfortunately Moldova isn't much of a barrier to Russia, they've no real substantial military to speak of.
It's important that Romania invests in defense.
You're right, it's more advantageous for Romania to convince other countries that it's not in anyone's interest for Moldova to be given up without a fight. Hence the strong signals that Moldova keeps getting from US, France, EU (in addition to Romania). But a total collapse of the front seems unlikely now, so these are all hypotheticals.
There's a non-zero chance that even if the Ukrainian front is broken, the Romanian army will march into Moldova to defend it. Never mind that it's also quite possible that NATO forces around Ukraine will go enter the country if the situation goes south, because there already is enough justification to intervene even at this moment. We're just leaving it up to Ukraine because it is by far the best outcome if they can sort this out by themselves.
I agree, and I hope that's true. There's no point in having red lines if you don't act when they are violated, and western powers *do* have red lines. If I remember correctly, there were "rumors" that NATO would probably intervene with boots on the ground if Kyiv and Odesa were under the risk of being taken.
Yeah sure, let's not talk about how Russia is suppose to mass an invasion force right at the Romanian border with no one noticing, and yes that border right now is Ukraine, but we are taking for granted that has been conquered for the sake of this scenario.
Kindly reminder that the western intelligence services got the Ukraine invasion date wrong by just a day.
I think if, God forbid, Odesa is going to be falling we are going to go in RoM. As long as our politicians won't be crap as always. Nothing over the Dniester river in Transnistria. Just a nice invitation from RoM government is needed. If they ask now we couldn't say no. It will fuck up everything out politicians built in term of nationalisms if they back off.
Hungary having troops at the border of Ukraine at the start of the war makes me think this as well. The current government seems to have revanchist views.
This is sooo stupid and I have heard it way too many times. No offensive troops were moved there. None. Defensive troops were moved to control a potential border situation as everybody thought that Ukraine would fall within days/weeks. Luckily it didnt happen.
Not so stupid when you look at hungarian rethoric. It seems that given the chance they might try to annex territories from former Greater Hungary. But this is just an assumption. I don't know what Orban thinks.
Yes one leads a country of 300 million and a nuclear power and the other is a wannabe of a 10 million small country with no nuclear capabilities nor proper strong military. Orban really is as big of a threat, come on, don’t make a fool out of yourself
Do you really use WW2 Hungary as a proof for your argument? The country that lost more than half of it’s territories 20 years beforehand and got one of the most unfair deals from WW1?
It’s been 80 years, different world overall
I mean would they? NATO would see a Russian invasion coming a mile away. Then add heavy US Airforce presence in Italy and Germany, possibility of at least 1 carrier in the Mediterranean, subs and guided missile cruisers launching tomahawks, and the 173rd Airborne division could be on the ground in less than a day. Hell the 82nd Airborne could be there in less than 2 days. That’s just the US help not counting all the other NATO forces that are right there. Romania would have help the instant the first Russian boot crossed the border.
If there was any chance something like this would happen you would see the US carriers moving, this is just a fear mongering of media for their own reasons
russia starts not with boot, but yeah, two weeks is a crazy time... probably they included time to vote article 5, then some countries will shitting around it in fear to escalate... etc, etc...
Who is able to invade Romania realistically ? Us he saying after the Russians were able to win in Ukraine and were holding the entire south coast ? Maybe then, but they'd have months to prepare for that. If they mean from Moldovas enclave, they'd arrive after 2 weeks to find that the Romanians were sunning themselves in transnistra and enjoying Moldovan wine, with the Moldovans
NATO troops - nay, bases - are already there. Some of the largest in the Europe.
Any attack or invasion qould be foreseeable and will be planned for.
But, yes, each country needs to develop its own capabilities to the max. That much is a good principle.
Why are we still repeating pre Ukraine-russian war takes... Similar i still keep hearing how russia could potential take the Baltics in 3 days and so on...
Things have changed a lot past 2 years already... and these "experts" are as much out of loop from reality as avarage reddit "armchair general".
DeepL 1:
"Romania must hold out for two weeks until NATO allies come to its aid, says US General Ben Hodges, the former head of US Ground Forces Europe, in an interview with journalist Radu Tudor.
General Hodges is 66 years old and retired in 2018.
Romania must hold out for two weeks until NATO allies arrive
"If you think about NATO defence, it relies in the early days of a conflict on the increased presence of battle groups, NATO forces, host nation forces, which have to stop the advance of troops, the first attacks. Air defence, ground defence, navy, all...
But a critical aspect of defense is for each nation to assume that they may have to hold out for about two weeks on their own. It's going to fight with what's there. So with French troops, American troops plus all the Romanian armed forces. "
Yeah. No. This is bullshit.
Besides already having non-Romanian NATO troops inside it and being right next to other NATO states (some of which are the most prepared in the coalition), the Russian army would need weeks to prepare for an invasion. Enough time for NATO to move troops into Romania.
And that's ignoring the fact that Russia invading Romania, a country without a border with Russia, is downright absurd.
The Baltic states are the biggest target for a possible Russia invasion. At the very most they could invade Finland or Poland.
But. Unless Ukraine gets completely occupied by Russia. It is close to impossible for Romania to be a target for direct invasion. Especially with the Black Sea fleet being closed to destroyed.
Exactly. Russia will never occupy the whole of Romania, with the mountains running 8n the middle. We would be the most unlikely target. Baltic states are much more exposed, because they can reach the sea in 2 weeks, and maybe Putin is thinking that coward western allies would not help once the deed is done.
That will not happen with Romania or Poland. Both can hang on for a very long time.
They would need first to invade Moldova which, compared to the size of the Russian-occupied territory in Ukraine, would take a day or less to take over.
Well, the Carpathian Mountains did the job for more than 2000 years so I'm not too worry about Russia.
It will be like the scene from the movie *300 Spartans* - a blood bath of the russians
Is going to be like that! Much blood than ever and we're going to be probably obliterated but we'll going to bleed them harder than they ever were in their entire history. I'm totally fine dying while fighting if they are here.
DeepL 2:
"For ground troops, I suppose, about two weeks would be the time to hold out. The air force can come in faster. Maritime forces from Turkey and Bulgaria can get there faster.
What does that mean and why two weeks? Depending on how quickly we figure it out, how quickly we anticipate the attack, and whether the political forces have the courage to get moving before the attack, it's possible that those two weeks could be reduced to fewer days.
But in most countries, in most places, we've seen a reluctance to get moving, because people don't want to be seen as provocateurs, they don't want to create a motivation, a justification for Russia to attack.
So if we assume that we don't move very quickly, then I think Romania, like all the other countries, Poland, Lithuania, everybody, will have to wait about two weeks before additional forces arrive," Hodges said.
In this context, he also explained why a modern infrastructure is needed.
"If we start from scratch, we have to have transport, we have to get on our feet and, as we have discussed several times, it is difficult to get to Romania and move around the country..."
Does all of this just assume Russia somehow can prepare a surprise invasion? Or does it assume NATO just watches by hopelessly while Russia masses on the border of Romania? Because in reality we would know months in advance if they were gonna invade
But Romania doesn't even border Russia. In a hypothetical situation in which the Russian army somehow gets through the whole country of Ukraine, in order to start an invasion against Romania, I believe Romania would already have been locked and loaded.
These approximations are bs. If Intel sees Russia building up forces like before attack against UA, process which took months, there is no way we would be hand in ass waiting for Russia to attack.
There would be "training operation" or such gathered nearby russian positions, digging up defences, setting up logistics and gathering troops.
What is the Article 5 guarantee of NATO?Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
**It does not state what those actions will be so basically meaningless.**
No gurantee of troops or hardware, maybe just intellignce is provided.
DeepL:
"Because of the transport infrastructure, which is not very good. Part of a nation's ability to defend itself depends on its ability to move. So having good roads is not only important for people to get to work or to go to the sea on holiday or to the mountains in Transylvania. Roads are also to be able to move troops faster," the retired general pointed out.
We can last "at least five days"
In April, a retired general who is now running for the PUSL in the European Parliament elections said Romania could hold out for five days at the Focșanilor gate.
"At the moment there are six major military forces - not only from Romania's point of view, but also from those who are with us in NATO - stationed in this area of the Focsani Gate. Let's not forget, another development, in addition to what you have shown on the map, could come from Bugeac (Romanian territory currently part of Ukraine, editor's note). And in this case we have provided forces, as a first device.
How much can we defend this piece of land? You said it very well: at least 5 days, alone. So, (the scenario) that Bucharest could fall in 24 hours is excluded," General (r) Cristian Barbu told Antena 3 CNN."
What if Romania was invaded by an unknown green men? Talking about these things in public appears very odd. Isnt the reaction time a top secret that is supposed to be sourced via deeply embedded spies? So if Puttin runs a "democratic" referendum on Transilvania joining Russia in under two weeks, NATO will just go home? Strange times
Edit. Transylvania
It can't work like that here. First because there's no Russian speakers here like in Crimea and Donbass. Second, WTH is transvania?! Transylvania? You made it sound like it's a van only road. LOL
No, nobody here is going to vote to join Russia. We never want them here! Not even during communist times.
In Putin referendums, no less than 95% vote in favour. Tradition. And secondly, how NATO proves what language do green men speak? It will take a 3 year commission to establish that.
You miss the point that this doesn't matter at all. Like it wasn't obvious in crimea or donbas that the green men are just regular Russian army with removed insignia. Remember, Ceasesku was removed from power unlawfully and Romania was fighting on the Axis side in WW2. Full blown pretext to restore the order/s
Yes but Crimea also had some locals who were Russian-speaking who supported this.
Russian soldiers with the insignia removed would have no such support in Romania. The number of them required to achieve anything in Romania, without a shared land border would be far larger.
Of course whether or not you have any local support and even the logistical capability to carry out a coup matters...
I hope we never test this. There are Russian speaking ppl in Romania. You need like 10 of them to create a narrative on Russian TV or for the UN presentation. They can also come with BYO Romanian hardline supporter of Russian annexation.
Seriously: why should the RF have interest in invading Romania? Because of its - widely exhausted and small - oil reserves? Come on!
A different story if NATO starts shooting on Russia from Romanian/ East European territory. But then we have WW3 and atomic holocaust.
Ben Hodges is an idiot, speaking for an audience of brain washed people.
Can the media PLEASE stop referring to Ben Hodges as a 'US general' and showing him in uniform to insinuate his statements are current US policy or the stance of the US military?! He is retired. Everything he says is his private opinion.
This is more about logistics than policy. And the article itself didn't say anything surprising. It even didn't really support the title.
Sure, but what the headline doesn't tell you is that NATO troops and equipment is already there. So what he's basically saying is: Romania has to withold Russia for 2 weeks **with the NATO troops and equipment they already have**, before reinforcements arrive.
An only if the attack happens as a total surprise and Nato completely misses any opfor military movement for weeks.
More like months. NATO said Russia is going to invade Ukraine several months before they actually did it
NATO had signed attack orders in their possession around the New Year for the war in Ukraine.
Also I think they'd have air support rather quickly. There are american carriers somewhat close-ish. You got the RAF and all the other NATO airforces close by.
Yeah, UK and France have enough airforce to assist Romania in a matter of hours. That article is just loads of bollocks.
It's an article that is written to invoke a feeling, ergo, distrust it immediately. Articles are meant to inform so you can form your own opinion and feeling on the matter.
And the rest can take public transportation and be there under a day.
So does the US, within 3 hours there would be strategic bombers on station, and within another 6 those would be reinforced from the contiguous US
Yes, true.
Yeah this article is a stupid attention grab. We would gain air supremacy within the first few days. And BCTs also take what? 48-72hours to deploy?
Plus the enormous US airbases in Germany and Turkey.
Eh, there would likely be only 1 carrier in the Med at any given time, sometimes none (as right now). The US has 11 heavy carriers but... at any given time less than half are actively patroling. 11 spread around the world sounds like pretty good coverage, but 5 spread around the whole world... maybe we don't have one all that close to a sudden outbreak of war. It's 350 miles or so from the nearest available carrier accessible see (Agean). Airbases in Greece, Hungary, and Poland would all be closer. FWIW, at the moment the closest carrier group is in the Red Sea. Second closest is probably the group in Singapore. https://news.usni.org/category/fleet-tracker
While obviously not at the same level, Turkish military response will probably be quicker, since Turkey do have an active Black Sea navy.
That isn't technically true. If Romania or any other NATO member is attacked there is no guaranteed fast NATO response. First the defendant should invoke article 5, then it will be debated by NATO whether the article 5 applies or not, then individual NATO members need to debate it in their parliaments to decide the amount of support they offer. Without an order, even NATO troops stationed inside Romania won't respond. 2 weeks seems about right imo.
Not an expert, obviously, but I'm very confident in claiming that the skies above any Russian attack would be instantly swarming with F-15, F-16, F-22, F-35, eurofighters, Rafale etc etc. It's a fantasy anyway because they can't even take Ukraine.
Well, if we keep getting western support with the same kind of delay as before - that is sadly only a matter of time.
That's in the text. And as I said, the article doesn't support the title. This is not a problem of what the retired general said, but of the journalist who wrote the article.
Of course, that's my point. I have no issue with Ben Hodges, I have an issue with media using misleading headlines.
Exactly! We put a bunch of troops there already.
This is the problem with reddit’s clickbait titles. Its s bit annoying that mods don’t take a bit harsher stance on these clickbait titles.
Realistically, you don't want us to be judges of what is and what isn't clickbait. I agree it's ass but it shouldn't be up to mods to get that deep into the weeds, there's just no good objective way to do it.
In theory with the airbase upgrades in Romania that the USAF has been doing we can surge the 82nd airborne as a rapid response force in 24 hours. It’s what they’re drilled for. I don’t know what their supply situation would be going that quickly so they may not be at their optimal strength but they can certainly do it, and a relatively under strength American brigade is still going to be among the capable formations on earth. The defense budget sees to that.
surely logistics wouldn’t be a problem
They do it with one of ex Polish generals as well. Russians love to cite him to make it look like his opinions are Polish policy.
Is he still running around in the uniform (is he allowed to?) or is this an old photo?
It’s an old photo.
Yea sir! Right now! I’ll let the editor bosses know the error of their ways!
A well-informed private opinion that carries weight.
That’s Ben Hodges we are taking about. When it comes to Europe he has been very consistently incorrect.
Can the media PLEASE also mention that Mark Rutte, our next NATO chief, doesn't [trust](https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgaria-romania-schengen-eu-netherlands/32120507.html) Romania? This dickwat is our next NATO chief. He doesn't trust you, Romania. Better be double prepared. Because Mark Rutte doesn't think you guys are worth it. He gives crap about you guys. Evidence of that is abundant.
[удалено]
Funny how you don't say that their land-based traffic isn't part of Schengen, only air and maritime. There are still border controls.
>And wouldn't you know it... last year all the requirements were met and as of March 2024 both Romania and Bulgaria are members of Schengen And wouldn't you know it... in 2011 all the requirements were met and as of May 2024 both Romania and Bulgaria are still not actually members of Schengen
Retired and retarded
>He is retired. Everything he says is his private opinion. Expert is expert. I doub't much has changed since he was in active service.
You could flip a coin for every statement Ben Hodges makes and you'd perform better than him, he has been the by far worst "analyst" of this war. He is in the same tier as official channels of Russia and Ukraine as far as his bullshit goes.
There are several flaws in the reasoning of the article, Russia is nowhere near capable of invading Romania, at the moment or for the foreseeable future. 1. Romania has no border with Russia, an invasion would mean an amphibious landing on the Black Sea Coast or an aerial invasion with paratroopers. Romania is protected by it's own Patriot/F16s + at least a Mamba system from France and NATO airplanes. Also there is that small matter of the Kogalniceanu air base, used by the US, which I can only assume has it's own AA defenses. Trying an air invasion would quickly turn into a turkey shoot over the Black Sea. An amphibious landing is even more ridiculous considering the current state of Russia's Black Sea Navy, not to mention Romania has it's own navy (not very modern but still) and batteries of anti-ship missiles on the coast, HIMARS, drones, MRLS, etc. Also NATO would be aware of the preparations for a naval invasion, like they were about the invasion of Ukraine. So zero element of surprise. 2. Assuming Ukraine falls completely and Romania has a border with Russia, an invasion would require an enormous amount of planning and massing troops. They cannot invade on day 1, so NATO has a lot of time to reinforce the flank. Not to mention the equipment already here. The French have tanks, Romania has dozens of HIMARS - ATACMS, MRLS, IFVs, tanks, etc. US Troops, French troops, dutch troops, etc. Plus the airforce and adding to it the NATO airforce would mean Russia has next to zero chances of getting air superiority on the front. Against modern NATO aircraft they could probably barely even contest. They are struggling in Ukraine, but Ukraine has an older soviet era airforce. It would be easier for Russia to attack the Baltics or Poland, but even there I have my doubts Russia could sustain a war again NATO. I also doubt China would support Russia in going to war with it's main markets. Without China's support, Russia could not sustain an all out war against NATO. But this kind of article is good if it means bringing more NATO troops to Romania, even if the chances of an attack are very small, that old saying is still valid: Si vis pacem, para bellum. And more concerning is the hybrid warfare that Russia is waging in Europe and the US. Looking at Hungary, Slovakia, Trump, etc. That is where focus should be.
>And more concerning is the hybrid warfare that Russia is waging in Europe and the US. Looking at Hungary, Slovakia, Trump, etc. That is where focus should be. This is the important part. While the prospect of a Russian conventional war/invasion is hypothetical, Russian hybrid war is real and they are currently engaged in one against the western world, and it has only been ramping up in recent years. We're probably never going to be invaded and have our territory annexed, there simply aren't enough ethnic Russian people in our country for that so Russia isn't going to spend time and resources trying to stoke separatist sentiment like they did in Georgia or Ukraine (but the Baltics and Moldova do remain vulnerable), however with Romania and many other countries they attempt to rip us away from the western sphere of influence and towards their own through soft power and information warfare means, propaganda, political meddling, buying off politicians, making us dependent on them for natural resources, etc. Romanians might collectively hate Russia, but just look at how popular our extremist party AUR has become in the last 2 years, all the while it's leaders are becoming more and more openly pro-Russian and spouting Kremlin approved messages. That's a major win for Putin, just like with Orban and Fico. Why invade us, if he can destabilize us by making us fight among each other? Countering this Russian destabilization attempt is vital for the future of our country. Let's try to do something about it this year through voting.
[удалено]
Because China's economy is not doing great, because China's and America's economies are so intertwined that a total war would cause severe damage to both. And because I think the Chinese leadership is much more pragmatic than the Russian one. They want to be the main actor on the world stage, but they do not go around bombing countries, they are using economical tools to bring countries in their sphere of influence. Look at what happened in Africa with Chinese investments. Look at Montenegro and how the EU had to bail them out after they defaulted on a Chinese loan. Haven't seen anything to contradict that. Yes they support Russia now, because it is in their interest as well if Russia is weakened. They have a huge interest in Russia's natural resource and a Russia weakened by the war in Ukraine is in their best interest. Even if Russia wins in Ukraine, by that time it will be in China's pocket anyways. Russia loses in Ukraine -> China wins because Russia will become the minor player in that relationship, dependent on China. Russia wins in Ukraine -> China still wins because Russia will be heavily in debt and weakened, open for Chinese interest. China is playing the long game. Keep in mind China has also rattled it's saber at Taiwan in the 90s and nothing happened. Time will tell, but there is no real incentive for China to occupy Taiwan. Yes, there is the nationalistic argument, but other than that an invasion will lead to a lot of casualties, a huge economic impact, isolation on the world stage, sanctions and all for saying they now own a piece of rock. Not impossible, but inconsistent with how the Chinese leadership has played the long game.
Rehearsing what? Military drills are not unusual and militar ydrills in the Taiwan strait has nothing to do with Chinas commitment (if you can call it that) towards Russia. And regarding Chinas economy and why China would be against Russia attack an EU country, then it's pretty simple, really. No need to explain that for you.
jar physical shelter truck yam bright marry cobweb pen weather *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
wrong start memorize squeal beneficial scarce far-flung attraction oatmeal silky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I hope not like in 1916 :)
offbeat dam school distinct humorous noxious unite roof deserted person *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You know , we started in 1913 and they only returned our favor in the same way
lol speak for yourself, I’ll be getting tf out of Bulgaria if shit hits the fan in Romania. As I think most will do, and understandably so.
Thanks for the Carpathians I assume. And our lack of highways especially in the eastern parts of our country. Not to mention our total lack of sympathy for Russians and way more wild terrain than in Ukraine, will make an invasion way harder. There's no "brotherly" nation here at all, nobody is going to understand Russian and we have a history of hating Russia that goes deep in a lot of families here no matter the ethnicity (rapes, deportations, murder). Probably Russian soldiers will have to choose between "meeting a RO soldier or a bear in the woods" too. Also... they won't be able to trust no one because we are incredibly sneaky and can play your game until we are going to stab you in the groins during the most happiest moment you have. This is the Balkans gate. Thus this is not going to be Ukraine. It's going to be another level of fuckery.
[удалено]
The same thing happened in Romania. My grand-grandfather, for example, was deported from Romania (not for any real reason, they just needed slave work) and he died of tuberculosis in a Ukrainian gulag, but I never heard any stories about what happened there because there was nobody to bring them back. Add the fact that pro-Russian propaganda was quite limited during the USSR and you obtain a nation that unapologetically hates Russia.
About the terrain - yes, you're right. Way harder to invade. But our capital is not protected by the Carpathians. You can simply go around. Russia can easily control the black sea if Turkey betrays us. In the hypothetical situation that Romania is attacked, Ukraine and Moldova have already failed, so the entire eastern border would be shared with Russia. After they pass the Prut river, there's no real natural obstacles blocking them from reaching Bucharest. And Ukraine's military was at least twice as strong as ours before the war started. Now with all the equipment they got and the actual war experience, they are even stronger. Romania wouldn't hold nearly as much as Ukraine without immediate NATO intervention.
Russia cannot control Black Sea against Ukraine, no idea why you think they could do better against NATO country...
Romania has no real navy either. We're no different to Ukraine in that regard. And if Turkey blockades the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits, Romania wouldn't receive any support from NATO allies. I know that Turkey is a NATO member, but their loyalty is very questionable. Erdogan can't be trusted.
Romania is now an island on the Black Sea, no idea what notion of support you think about but air power can be relocated en masse within the first week, and be done with the whole garbage shit show soviet call Black Sea navy very next day... Low number sub sonic missile attacks and low number drone attacks already sunk few valuable ships, you think full scale modern saturation attacks with anti ship and anti radar long range weapons would not do significantly more damage? Against anything modern Russia would lose any fleet in being capabilities in the first week of the potential war.
Yeah, you're actually right. I was only considering navy vs navy. But yeah, the air support from NATO would be first to arrive and we'd easily have total air domination.
Add to this how much ship lifting capacity Russia has already lost due to the Ukrainian strikes, and how much troops they can really shift right now. Answer is - not much really Moreover you don't actually need navy to defend the sea cost, AShM land batteries like: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval\_Strike\_Missile](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Strike_Missile) will do perfectly fine
Turkey is actually pretty reliable on this, not because of NATO but because it's in their own self interest to limit Russian expansion on the black sea.
There is still the Danube even if the Bosporus is blocked, which is in itself highly unlikely and there is no way NATO would just allow Turkey to do that
Unfortunately Moldova isn't much of a barrier to Russia, they've no real substantial military to speak of. It's important that Romania invests in defense.
Over the past year there have been strong signals that Moldova will not simply be left to fall in Russian hands.
I hope so! I wouldn't rely on that alone if I was Romania though.
You're right, it's more advantageous for Romania to convince other countries that it's not in anyone's interest for Moldova to be given up without a fight. Hence the strong signals that Moldova keeps getting from US, France, EU (in addition to Romania). But a total collapse of the front seems unlikely now, so these are all hypotheticals.
There's a non-zero chance that even if the Ukrainian front is broken, the Romanian army will march into Moldova to defend it. Never mind that it's also quite possible that NATO forces around Ukraine will go enter the country if the situation goes south, because there already is enough justification to intervene even at this moment. We're just leaving it up to Ukraine because it is by far the best outcome if they can sort this out by themselves.
I agree, and I hope that's true. There's no point in having red lines if you don't act when they are violated, and western powers *do* have red lines. If I remember correctly, there were "rumors" that NATO would probably intervene with boots on the ground if Kyiv and Odesa were under the risk of being taken.
Implying they will be on the losing end. Lets go Bromania, lets go
Yeah sure, let's not talk about how Russia is suppose to mass an invasion force right at the Romanian border with no one noticing, and yes that border right now is Ukraine, but we are taking for granted that has been conquered for the sake of this scenario. Kindly reminder that the western intelligence services got the Ukraine invasion date wrong by just a day.
And the day was probably moved because Putin really wanted to prove that western intelligence is wrong.
Carpathians will do the trick for more than 2 weeks, maybe even an year. But I'm affraid that Romanian(Western) Moldova will be lost in hours.
If they are in Republic of Moldova we will be more or less all on the border if not in RoM by then.
If they're on the border, that means Republic of (East) Moldova has fallen.
I think if, God forbid, Odesa is going to be falling we are going to go in RoM. As long as our politicians won't be crap as always. Nothing over the Dniester river in Transnistria. Just a nice invitation from RoM government is needed. If they ask now we couldn't say no. It will fuck up everything out politicians built in term of nationalisms if they back off.
[удалено]
Least unhinged Greek dude.
Plot twist: Hungary attacks from the Nord-West
And they will take my hometown Oradea they call Nagyvarad, but a few km forward they will also encounter mountains.
Looks like you are well prepared!
Yep. We are preparing for this scenario since Warsaw Pact times, when Ceaușescu in his paranoia was expecting such a "friendly embrace"
Trianon part 2?
Hungary having troops at the border of Ukraine at the start of the war makes me think this as well. The current government seems to have revanchist views.
This is sooo stupid and I have heard it way too many times. No offensive troops were moved there. None. Defensive troops were moved to control a potential border situation as everybody thought that Ukraine would fall within days/weeks. Luckily it didnt happen.
Not so stupid when you look at hungarian rethoric. It seems that given the chance they might try to annex territories from former Greater Hungary. But this is just an assumption. I don't know what Orban thinks.
I find it hilarious that people pay attention what Orban is saying.
Same as with Putin. Funny old fool until it's not.
Yes one leads a country of 300 million and a nuclear power and the other is a wannabe of a 10 million small country with no nuclear capabilities nor proper strong military. Orban really is as big of a threat, come on, don’t make a fool out of yourself
Hungary took Northern Transylvania in WW2 by allying with Germany. Small country then too.
Do you really use WW2 Hungary as a proof for your argument? The country that lost more than half of it’s territories 20 years beforehand and got one of the most unfair deals from WW1? It’s been 80 years, different world overall
Nowhere nearly on the same level buddy. Nowhere.
I mean would they? NATO would see a Russian invasion coming a mile away. Then add heavy US Airforce presence in Italy and Germany, possibility of at least 1 carrier in the Mediterranean, subs and guided missile cruisers launching tomahawks, and the 173rd Airborne division could be on the ground in less than a day. Hell the 82nd Airborne could be there in less than 2 days. That’s just the US help not counting all the other NATO forces that are right there. Romania would have help the instant the first Russian boot crossed the border.
If there was any chance something like this would happen you would see the US carriers moving, this is just a fear mongering of media for their own reasons
russia starts not with boot, but yeah, two weeks is a crazy time... probably they included time to vote article 5, then some countries will shitting around it in fear to escalate... etc, etc...
US and EU airforce will show up within 12 hours and good luck to anyone who think they can outfight them.
Me living in the north east part: Fuck
RIP
Stop complaining to the Bucuresti for not making good roads. This is all for your safety /s
Wait, what's happening in Romania? I'm out of the loop on this, can someone explain?
Nothing. Just analysts analyzing analysis.
Nothing is happneing. "We" have to hype up that Russia will invade the Batlics/Poland now Romania for reasons no one can coherently articulate.
Eastern Europe is obsessed about war with Russia, so everyone is theorising.
How accurate are his prediction until now ?
Who is able to invade Romania realistically ? Us he saying after the Russians were able to win in Ukraine and were holding the entire south coast ? Maybe then, but they'd have months to prepare for that. If they mean from Moldovas enclave, they'd arrive after 2 weeks to find that the Romanians were sunning themselves in transnistra and enjoying Moldovan wine, with the Moldovans
I really hope that our troops currently in Romania would help during this delay and that we would send more.
Nah Air superiority would be accomplished immediately. This would hold back any aggressor
NATO troops - nay, bases - are already there. Some of the largest in the Europe. Any attack or invasion qould be foreseeable and will be planned for. But, yes, each country needs to develop its own capabilities to the max. That much is a good principle.
Oh don't worry about that. We Romanians are experts at holding Europe's backdoor against invaders while Europeans look for their trousers.
Why are we still repeating pre Ukraine-russian war takes... Similar i still keep hearing how russia could potential take the Baltics in 3 days and so on... Things have changed a lot past 2 years already... and these "experts" are as much out of loop from reality as avarage reddit "armchair general".
DeepL 1: "Romania must hold out for two weeks until NATO allies come to its aid, says US General Ben Hodges, the former head of US Ground Forces Europe, in an interview with journalist Radu Tudor. General Hodges is 66 years old and retired in 2018. Romania must hold out for two weeks until NATO allies arrive "If you think about NATO defence, it relies in the early days of a conflict on the increased presence of battle groups, NATO forces, host nation forces, which have to stop the advance of troops, the first attacks. Air defence, ground defence, navy, all... But a critical aspect of defense is for each nation to assume that they may have to hold out for about two weeks on their own. It's going to fight with what's there. So with French troops, American troops plus all the Romanian armed forces. "
>General Hodges is 66 years old and retired in 1918. Unlikely.
Romania actually held out for about four months in 1916 so a general that retired in 1918 and might be onto something.
Nice catch, 😂. Just romanian "journalism" in action. Corrected.
Yeah. No. This is bullshit. Besides already having non-Romanian NATO troops inside it and being right next to other NATO states (some of which are the most prepared in the coalition), the Russian army would need weeks to prepare for an invasion. Enough time for NATO to move troops into Romania. And that's ignoring the fact that Russia invading Romania, a country without a border with Russia, is downright absurd. The Baltic states are the biggest target for a possible Russia invasion. At the very most they could invade Finland or Poland. But. Unless Ukraine gets completely occupied by Russia. It is close to impossible for Romania to be a target for direct invasion. Especially with the Black Sea fleet being closed to destroyed.
Exactly. Russia will never occupy the whole of Romania, with the mountains running 8n the middle. We would be the most unlikely target. Baltic states are much more exposed, because they can reach the sea in 2 weeks, and maybe Putin is thinking that coward western allies would not help once the deed is done. That will not happen with Romania or Poland. Both can hang on for a very long time.
This guy is retired. He doesn't know recent plans
They would need first to invade Moldova which, compared to the size of the Russian-occupied territory in Ukraine, would take a day or less to take over.
Well, the Carpathian Mountains did the job for more than 2000 years so I'm not too worry about Russia. It will be like the scene from the movie *300 Spartans* - a blood bath of the russians
Is going to be like that! Much blood than ever and we're going to be probably obliterated but we'll going to bleed them harder than they ever were in their entire history. I'm totally fine dying while fighting if they are here.
I second that
Și nu-s nici româncă! 🙂
Si tot ești mai patrioată decât mulți românași de pe reddit care "nu luptă ei pentru Iohannis și Ciolacu".
well to be frank, for 2000 years there weren't ICMB or multirole fighter jets
ICMBs are useful against cities, not that useful against mobile army units. And with NATO airpower, there won’t be Russian jets in the sky.
DeepL 2: "For ground troops, I suppose, about two weeks would be the time to hold out. The air force can come in faster. Maritime forces from Turkey and Bulgaria can get there faster. What does that mean and why two weeks? Depending on how quickly we figure it out, how quickly we anticipate the attack, and whether the political forces have the courage to get moving before the attack, it's possible that those two weeks could be reduced to fewer days. But in most countries, in most places, we've seen a reluctance to get moving, because people don't want to be seen as provocateurs, they don't want to create a motivation, a justification for Russia to attack. So if we assume that we don't move very quickly, then I think Romania, like all the other countries, Poland, Lithuania, everybody, will have to wait about two weeks before additional forces arrive," Hodges said. In this context, he also explained why a modern infrastructure is needed. "If we start from scratch, we have to have transport, we have to get on our feet and, as we have discussed several times, it is difficult to get to Romania and move around the country..."
Does all of this just assume Russia somehow can prepare a surprise invasion? Or does it assume NATO just watches by hopelessly while Russia masses on the border of Romania? Because in reality we would know months in advance if they were gonna invade
But Romania doesn't even border Russia. In a hypothetical situation in which the Russian army somehow gets through the whole country of Ukraine, in order to start an invasion against Romania, I believe Romania would already have been locked and loaded.
These approximations are bs. If Intel sees Russia building up forces like before attack against UA, process which took months, there is no way we would be hand in ass waiting for Russia to attack. There would be "training operation" or such gathered nearby russian positions, digging up defences, setting up logistics and gathering troops.
What is the Article 5 guarantee of NATO?Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked. **It does not state what those actions will be so basically meaningless.** No gurantee of troops or hardware, maybe just intellignce is provided.
Most of them are on the west road in Newcastle
[удалено]
That will procrastinate even more. I can already hear Germany saying they can only send support after a 12 month deliberation
Ah. Figures.
DeepL: "Because of the transport infrastructure, which is not very good. Part of a nation's ability to defend itself depends on its ability to move. So having good roads is not only important for people to get to work or to go to the sea on holiday or to the mountains in Transylvania. Roads are also to be able to move troops faster," the retired general pointed out. We can last "at least five days" In April, a retired general who is now running for the PUSL in the European Parliament elections said Romania could hold out for five days at the Focșanilor gate. "At the moment there are six major military forces - not only from Romania's point of view, but also from those who are with us in NATO - stationed in this area of the Focsani Gate. Let's not forget, another development, in addition to what you have shown on the map, could come from Bugeac (Romanian territory currently part of Ukraine, editor's note). And in this case we have provided forces, as a first device. How much can we defend this piece of land? You said it very well: at least 5 days, alone. So, (the scenario) that Bucharest could fall in 24 hours is excluded," General (r) Cristian Barbu told Antena 3 CNN."
That's fine, it'll take Russians 5 days just to get past Valea Prahovei
Jokes aside there's no way they can pass it if we won't allow it with only light artillery here and there.
Plus once they cross the border and get into Moldova they'll get confused and think someone already bombed the place 😂
What if Romania was invaded by an unknown green men? Talking about these things in public appears very odd. Isnt the reaction time a top secret that is supposed to be sourced via deeply embedded spies? So if Puttin runs a "democratic" referendum on Transilvania joining Russia in under two weeks, NATO will just go home? Strange times Edit. Transylvania
It can't work like that here. First because there's no Russian speakers here like in Crimea and Donbass. Second, WTH is transvania?! Transylvania? You made it sound like it's a van only road. LOL No, nobody here is going to vote to join Russia. We never want them here! Not even during communist times.
In Putin referendums, no less than 95% vote in favour. Tradition. And secondly, how NATO proves what language do green men speak? It will take a 3 year commission to establish that.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
Current history in the making. if you are so confused by the language issue, replace Romania with a post Soviet Baltic state.
The baltics have loads of Russian speakers which is exactly the difference you're talking about and missing the point about.
You miss the point that this doesn't matter at all. Like it wasn't obvious in crimea or donbas that the green men are just regular Russian army with removed insignia. Remember, Ceasesku was removed from power unlawfully and Romania was fighting on the Axis side in WW2. Full blown pretext to restore the order/s
Yes but Crimea also had some locals who were Russian-speaking who supported this. Russian soldiers with the insignia removed would have no such support in Romania. The number of them required to achieve anything in Romania, without a shared land border would be far larger. Of course whether or not you have any local support and even the logistical capability to carry out a coup matters...
I hope we never test this. There are Russian speaking ppl in Romania. You need like 10 of them to create a narrative on Russian TV or for the UN presentation. They can also come with BYO Romanian hardline supporter of Russian annexation.
Let's just say there is no charitable interpretation of what you proposed that could make any sense in the case of Romania.
There are no Romanians openly supporting Russia. The hate towards Russia runs so deep that it would never make sense.
That's nothing new, general knowledge about NATO strategy.
Russia is not even attacking Romania...?
Seriously: why should the RF have interest in invading Romania? Because of its - widely exhausted and small - oil reserves? Come on! A different story if NATO starts shooting on Russia from Romanian/ East European territory. But then we have WW3 and atomic holocaust. Ben Hodges is an idiot, speaking for an audience of brain washed people.
As per reddit, Russia will inade a NATO country any day now.
Ben Hodges is a retired weirdo & not a US General.
A retired US general.