Author Topic: Romania and Transilvania  (Read 25041 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #30 on: November 15, 2005, 04:47:24 PM »
Quote

Laura (...)Why do you call her by her nickname all the time? That´s not respectful at all...)  


Because i am always in a hurry and it is easier like that"Missy" ;)being more familiar does not mean you are not respectful...also i 'd rather value her as a human being-Missy or Marie- than as a queen:)
Strange thing that you don't admire Empress Elisabeth...I DO ,for almost the same reasons i like Marie,but unfortunately we can't discuss this here since it has nothing to do with Transilvania:)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Laurra »

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #31 on: November 15, 2005, 05:04:39 PM »
Quote

Oh, those Hungarian names are so sexy! :P
I think that another part of the problem is that Hungary is a very female country, it sometimes acts like a beautiful spoilt girl. And the other eastern countries, especially Romania, are more male, even harsh. So when R. took away land/property from Hungary, the land reacted like every beautiful girl would react, she was extremly angry! That´s why some say that Hungary was "rapped" by Romania...


a very interesting point of view on the matter ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Laurra »

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #32 on: November 15, 2005, 05:31:56 PM »
Quote
The Romanian nobles (I am not sure guys, does there exist nobles in Romania?) surely lost all their property.
 


there were nobles in Romania...Sturdza ,Callimachi,Cantacuzino,Ghika, and many others

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #33 on: November 15, 2005, 05:35:41 PM »
Quote

living in the UK  i can certanly tell you that the government here does everything the Bush adminitration tells it.


true!!!

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #34 on: November 15, 2005, 06:15:55 PM »
Quote
you keep using the word stealing but you never argument on why the land should belong to hungary and not romania. i have given you plenty of reasons why transylvania should belong to romania. you haven't given me one valid reason for which it should belong to hungary. please try to state your case.


ilyala,i have one valid reason which we've heard several times ;D : for hundreds of years ,Transilvania was part of Hungary not of Romania,Hungarians were there first (no  matter Romanians were in  a  majority -and the majority decides!!!)  in conclusion  Transilvania should belong to Hungary not to Romania...my friends ,this is simply not enough,you need more arguments...

Offline ilyala

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2063
  • il y a
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #35 on: November 16, 2005, 01:36:51 AM »
ii have already argued that argument: greece and bulgaria were part of the ottoman empire for centuries, does that mean they should be turkish provinces now? any other arguments?
'loving might be a mistake, but it's worth making'
ilya


anabel

  • Guest
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #36 on: November 16, 2005, 06:16:25 AM »
Quote
(no  matter Romanians were in  a  majority -and the majority decides!!!)

That´s true, Laura, the majority should decide, but only in a democracy, and neither Hungary nor Romania were democracies at at time... Romania was first a kingdom, then a dictatorial kingdom and after 1947 a sovjet republic... In none of these forms of gouvernment the people decides what is happening, so why should they have decided in this case? It was only a bad excuse of those in power who wanted to teach Hungary a lesson. Some reasons why Transylvania should belong to Hungary:
- belong for Hungary for hundreds of years
- of course there were Romanians there, but those who had money and influence where Hungarians (the Hungarians made 35 %, only 15% less than the Romanians). So it was the Hungarians who brought wealth to Transylvania, not the Romanians.
- It was the most Hungarian parts of Hungary considering traditions, language, etc.


Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #37 on: November 16, 2005, 07:12:48 AM »
Quote
greece and bulgaria were part of the ottoman empire for centuries, does that mean they should be turkish provinces now?




Of course NOT ! ! ! God forbid!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Laurra »

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #38 on: November 16, 2005, 07:29:26 AM »
Quote
That´s true, Laura, the majority should decide, but only in a democracy, and neither Hungary nor Romania were democracies at at time... Romania was first a kingdom, then a dictatorial kingdom and after 1947 a sovjet republic... In none of these forms of gouvernment the people decides what is happening, so why should they have decided in this case? It was only a bad excuse of those in power who wanted to teach Hungary a lesson.



Anabel in cases like this (the end of the great war which  led to some countrie becoming winners and other counteries were defeated;1920' political situation in general etc.)the majority is very impotant-not necessary in a democracy...Romanians were in the majority and they voted this unification,and the government simply negociated after that...

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #39 on: November 16, 2005, 07:33:16 AM »
Quote
It was only a bad excuse of those in power who wanted to teach Hungary a lesson.



what do you mean by this??? i don't think this was the purpose???each defeated country lost something...more or less and each winning country gained something...more or less again...this things usually  happen in great wars,i might seem cynical to you but everything then favoured  Hungary's loss of territory and the unification of Transilvania with Romania
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Laurra »

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #40 on: November 16, 2005, 07:45:11 AM »
Quote
Some reasons why Transylvania should belong to Hungary:
- belong for Hungary for hundreds of years
- of course there were Romanians there, but those who had money and influence where Hungarians (the Hungarians made 35 %, only 15% less than the Romanians). So it was the Hungarians who brought wealth to Transylvania, not the Romanians.




True,Hungarians were richer than Romanians yet i don't think money or influence are that important here but that 15% is very important because that 15% made the difference
Anyway, this is an interesting reason ,Anabel!!and i agree on the importance of money and wealth in general for the economiocal progress of a region;yes indeed Hungarians and Germans were very,very important for /in Transilvania's development>>
But then again this "money matter"should not influence at all Transilvania's "ownership"...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Laurra »

Offline Laura_

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #41 on: November 16, 2005, 07:51:40 AM »
Quote

- It was the most Hungarian parts of Hungary considering traditions, language, etc.



Was it???wow then that's very sad for Hungary:(:(now it is the most important part of Romania considering everything but this is not a great consolation to Hungarians,obviously...

Offline ilyala

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2063
  • il y a
    • View Profile
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #42 on: November 16, 2005, 09:12:59 AM »
Quote
That´s true, Laura, the majority should decide, but only in a democracy, and neither Hungary nor Romania were democracies at at time...


and of course, because it wasn't a democracy for centuries it should keep not being a democracy for the following years, just to suit the hungarian purposes... you do realiz how ridiculous that sounds, right?

Quote
Romania was first a kingdom, then a dictatorial kingdom and after 1947 a sovjet republic...


romania was a constitutional monarchy. like britain is today. in case you were wondering, britain is a democratic country ;)

Quote
In none of these forms of gouvernment the people decides what is happening, so why should they have decided in this case? It was only a bad excuse of those in power who wanted to teach Hungary a lesson.


of course, the poor hungarians, the whole world decided that they were bad and decided to teach them a lesson. that's the worst conspiracy theory ever. no-one has anything against you, you lost transylvania because it shouldn't have been yours to begin with. you come up with all these reasons and here's an argument that can cancel each and every one of them:

Quote
Some reasons why Transylvania should belong to Hungary:
- belong for Hungary for hundreds of years


i repeat for the hundredth time: just because greece belonged to turkey for hundred of years, it doesn't been it should be a turkish province now. you still haven't cancelled that argument which cancels your argument. it also applies to transylvania, therefor it's invalid.

Quote
- of course there were Romanians there, but those who had money and influence where Hungarians (the Hungarians made 35 %, only 15% less than the Romanians). So it was the Hungarians who brought wealth to Transylvania, not the Romanians.


so, basically, what you are saying is that the people with money have more right to vote and decide what's going on with their country than people with no money. i find that nonsesical. in a democracy EVERYONE has a right to vote. and as i said, just because transylvania wasn't a democracy before doesn't mean it should never be a democracy.  the 1923 constitution of romania granted everyone the right to vote. therefor romania was a democratic country.
another thing: romanians in transylvania had no money because they didn't have any right to do any job that would bring much money. most romanians were serfs for centuries. after they stopped being serfs they were mostly poor people, oppressed by the people who 'tolerated' them. according to you, a system that is not democratic should stay not democratic and because centuries of oppressions made the peasants poor and the nobles rich, only the nobles should have a right to vote.
i really hope you don't believe that.

Quote
- It was the most Hungarian parts of Hungary considering traditions, language, etc.


really?! have you ever been to transylvania? i lived there. i still go there a month a year.  some houses look a little different but you know what the funny thing is: it's not the hungarian houses, it's the GERMAN houses that look different. the hungarian houses look just like the romanian ones. the towns look the same, the holidays are the same, the people look just like the other romanians, just that some of them (not most of them just some) speak a different language, and not because they don't know romanian but because they're too stubborn to use it. yes, there are hungarian communities and romanian communities, and some hungarian communities have different traditions, but i think we've already established that the romanian communities are more and bigger and so the romanian traditions are generally a majority.

any other arguments?
'loving might be a mistake, but it's worth making'
ilya


Linnea

  • Guest
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #43 on: November 16, 2005, 10:27:29 AM »
ilya, anabel is right here: Carol II. made Romania a dictatorial kingdom in 1940, which sadly means it hadn´t a contitution from then on. I presume it was a constitutional kingdom before that, just like GB or Norway. Good for Queen Marie that she didn´t have to see this!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Linnea »

Linnea

  • Guest
Re: Romania and Transilvania
« Reply #44 on: November 16, 2005, 10:36:00 AM »
ilya, you arguments that Greece was part of the Turkish empire for hundreds of years. That´s true, but there is an important difference between our problem here: Greece had been greek before the Osmanian empire was founded. Just think of the Greek philosophes who lived 2000 a.d.! So Greece existed long before. Here we do have another case: Transylvania hadn´t ever been a part of Romania before, it wasn´t traditionaly Romanian. It became a part of Romania in 1920 only because of the Romanian majority. BTW, how is the relationship between the counties today? Sometimes you read something in the newspapers (like the meeting between the governments recently), but I would like to hear it from you. Is this conflict really still so important?