Is there a single more butthurt country in Europe...

its their own fault for turning against the shitty habsburgers

t. Radu

What flag is this

>b-but your flag

Not an argument.

Just pretend I have a Romanian flag if it triggers you so much, Pisti.

You need to go back.

You remind me of Djoka. He was an underage Serb. He lived in Canada. He was jsut like you just the Serbian version. Then it turned out he is a fatso and he stopped psoting. LMAO.

Serbia, Russia and Ukraine are currently way more butthurt

Wenn will ugro Finns go back to Mongolia?

Attached: 1563995480867.png (741x568, 29K)

Thanks for proving my point about your butthurt.

>implying Finns have anything in common with Ugra-boogas

when you stop being submissive cucks, so never

The Gypsy flag. It uses the Hindu wheel

How do you find out this much about people?

I don't know about Serbia but at least Ukraine and Russia are butthurt about current events. Gypsies on the other hand are ko-koing about things that happened 100 years ago.

Attached: gypsy butthurt.jpg (584x779, 358K)

I am here 24/7 since 2012. lurking in every thread.
Go home.

You have to go back

>24/7 for 7 years
based

You first.

Attached: hungarian origins.png (463x226, 44K)

Romanians literally have 1-2% gypsy blood in them on average

As opposed to Hungarians, who have 100%?

I dont think there is a pure blooded gypsy in europe anymore, I think most of them are like 20% mena or european

have sex radu you loser

>I dont think there is a pure blooded gypsy in europe anymore

look in the mirror

I am not ROMAnian, so I dont really see the point
Also, chill out, mutt

Why are diaspora Niggers way more racist then the based people who stayed in their homeland?

Inside they feel shame and insecurity

>I am not ROMAnian

No, you're not. if you were, you'd be white.

False
>ROMAnian
Your stupidity is showing butthurt brainwashed Serb.

Roma (or rrom) is a term invented recently after Romania joined the Europe Union with a part of finance from Soros. The main idea was to create confusion between romanians and gypsies under the facade of inclusivity mainly throughout the Western Europe, especially in the founders states of EU (UK, France, Germany, Italy).
Since Eastern Europe has a very clear view on what gypsies are, this never really took off. Romanians still call them gypsies, crows, pigmented

Gypsies will call themselves gypsies proudly. They always did and when do they not, is when they are caught stealing.
They call themselves romanians when caught stealing or getting in trouble, and gypsies when they show off.

my brothers.....
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dom_people

Capital of Italy is Roma (in the future will be your capital too, kek)
You're insulting them more than you're insulting us, retarded fag

Attached: roma-signposts (1).jpg (486x648, 103K)

t. russian agent agitating hatred between countries

Attached: 1562801887359.jpg (1830x1029, 178K)

damn, this might be the most hardcore callput I've seen in a while, props

Attached: FE4BA1FB3E114510A5DA5BE16B0A9788.jpg (567x547, 47K)

funnily enough...
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyarab_people

>WE VLACHS HERE FIRST YOU BOZGOR!!

Attached: romanian-vlach-immigration-balkans-hungary.jpg (1024x956, 299K)

>we wuz always Transylvania, DON'T FORGET YOU MONGOL!!

Attached: Ethnographic-map-of-Hungary-1400s-late.png (2948x1750, 88K)

>b-but muh dacia, we iz dacians

Attached: hungary-over-centuries-years.png (500x3048, 1.53M)

That's "mildly" inaccurate

I'm not an expat but as someone from buenos aires, I've known a lot of them, my opinion is usless, but since everyone likes to speak out of their ass I'm going to give it anyways, I think the reason is that now that they are foreigners far away of their homeland they feel like outcasts and maybe a bit discriminated against so they feel insecure and thus try to cope by feeling superior through nationalism for a country they no longer belong to.

Nice gypsy propaganda.

Attached: ethno map census 1880.jpg (2948x2282, 2.92M)

Romanians literally are Romanised Daciains, yes. Also "indisputably the oldest and most numerous inhabitants of Transylvania" according to Josef II himself.

Attached: 1853 census of transylvania.jpg (1037x1647, 408K)

So because Finland was part of Sweden and Russia for centuries that means Finland is Swedish? Nah.

>Hungarians are so butthurt
>romanians a thread about us every third day
Your inferiority complex is showing.

Inwould say that it may be accurate if it was before the Mongol invasions in the 14th century, but it uses AH-era Kingdom of Hungary borders, so I dunno

Needless to say, Transylvania is very, very much Romanian now both demographically and administratively, so there's not much point debating about it other than to bitch and moan desu

Attached: sbe9d8gfp3421.png (3750x3637, 1.68M)

Friendly reminder that the Balkans is rightful Danube-Swabian clay.

The map is of the 15th century
Who cares what Josef II has to say when there's much more evidence to the contrary?
You don't get to claim an area based on a people who didn't even speak your language and were mixed with Avars, Pechenegs, and Cumans for centuries before even emerging as an actual political entity.

>The map is of the 15th century

The one I posted is from a census from 1880. Yours is just some made up bullshit, not even a historical document.

>Who cares what Josef II has to say

He traveled his lands extensively and wrote about them in his diary. He would have seen with his own eyes. Many other foreign travellers in Transylvania and the Danubian principalities remarked the same thing.

>You don't get to claim an area based on a people who didn't even speak your language

Wtf are you even talking about? There are documents in Romanian that survived from the 1500s and the language is virtually the same as today.

This map is much more accurateBut even on this map I can spot some very mild inaccuracies in Slovakia and Vojvodina (don't know about the other regions). The thing is that a lot of people in the mixed regions were bilingual and thus the people doing the census had the opportunity to assign them to their preferred ethnic group

>Is there a single more butthurt country in Europe?
No, this is the most pathetic nation in the world. Everything about Hungary is so cringy, just nuke us already.

Why are all Hungarians on Jow Forums so mean

>You don't get to claim an area based on a people who didn't even speak your language and were mixed with Avars, Pechenegs, and Cumans for centuries before even emerging as an actual political entity.

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Hungarians being butthurt and trying to tell other people about their history. kek

>two canadian hungarian diaspora arguing with Finnish romanian diaspora
what a great thread
anyways, here's the best map of AH langauge use I've found, it's too big for the measly 4MB filesize limit, so here's the link
files.catbox.moe/dmil1h.jpeg
yeah, there are no real ethnographies, the most you could go on was the language used at home. The above file falls in line with what finnolah posted, so I'd lean on his source more

Attached: 8lzalnhxpgo21.jpg (2250x1642, 843K)

>Russia

Attached: 1564359954083.jpg (598x448, 33K)

I love Hungary, and Hungarians, and you :) the only cringy thing about them are the Jingoists, but those are everywhere

Pekka, pentru mine sa stii ca tot bazat esti

t. cacatul de la medicina

Kek, puteam sa jur ca el e.

Have another, even earlier one.

commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnographic_map_of_austrian_monarchy_czoernig_1855.jpg

Attached: romanian land.jpg (2255x1704, 2.63M)

Atunci de ce te luai de mine? Ce pula mea ti-am facut? De ce trebuie sa fiti niste bucketcrabs si sa ne mancam unii pe altii? Distrugeti kohlchanul deja.

>He traveled his lands extensively and wrote about them in his diary. He would have seen with his own eyes.
Oh, so he literally saw Dacians that he could compare Romanians to?
>The one I posted is from a census from 1880.
Yes user, history started in 1880. The map I posted is based on Hungarian settlements. You can see the same outline of areas Hungarians used to make a majority in the map you posted.
>Wtf are you even talking about?
You said Romanians are Romanised Dacians, and the Dacians are a completely different people in part because they DIDN'T SPEAK ROMANIAN. Dacians didn't exist in the 16th century, and that's still long after Hungarians came to the Carpathian basin in 895.

>but those are everywhere
There are too many of them here, especially for a nation of ugly uppity manlets that has never accomplished anything noteworthy. One Trianon wasn't enough.

no one cares about your shit fuck off

>de ce te luai de mine?
>ce pula mea ti-am facut?
Ba, sincer, nici eu nu mai stiu. Pur si simplu faptul ca te luai de toata lumea ma scotea din sarite dar pana la urma mi-a trecut.

Nu trebuie sa ne mancam unii pe altii, tocmai asta e, dar imi dadeai impresia ca tu ai fi vrut sa ne mananci pe noi. In fine, nu mai are rost sa vorbim despre asta, e "fumata" deja. Ce a fost, a fost.

Muie tiganilor!!

Lumea se ia de tine pentru ca uneori te porti ca un ratat, nu ca ar avea ceva personal impotriva ta.
>t. cacatul de la Litere

>Blue party
Their former leader said that "we will sit in our tanks and destroy Budapest"
>Green party
Just your friendly neighborhood Neo-Nazi party

Just stop reading posts made by Neo-Nazis and go outside

Attached: Snímka.png (334x368, 30K)

>Their former leader said that "we will sit in our tanks and destroy Budapest"
Based, please do.

>Oh, so he literally saw Dacians that he could compare Romanians to?

He saw that they were the most numerous.

The map you posted is dubious.

Romanians are romance-speaking Dacians, in the same way Hungarians are hungarian-speaking slavs or whatever the fuck natives were in Pannonia (probably Romanians too). Deal with it.

That's what they get for opposing the Habsburg

>He saw that they were the most numerous.
You still haven't proved that Romanians are Dacians. " In 1595, out of a total population of 670,000, 52.2% were Hungarians, 28.4% Romanians, 18.8% Germans. Around 1650, Moldavian prince Vasile Lupu, in a letter written to the Sultan, affirms that the number of Romanians are already more than the one-third of the population.[38] By 1660, according to Miklós Molnár, 955,000 people lived in the principality (Partium included) and the population consisted of 500,000 Hungarians (including 250,000 Székelys), 280,000 Romanians, 90,000 Germans and 85,000 Serbians, Ukrainians and others and reached its end of century level."

I like how Hungarians have zero concept of Occam's Razor or maximum parsimony. If multiple historical sources describe Romanians as being the most numerous (even the founders of Moldova are supposed to have come from Maramureș - how the fuck did they get up there?), how were Romanians, a disadvantaged people, supposed to have achieved this demographic feat by migrating in when literally no other people in history has? Germans and Szecklers migrated in, they did not become the most numerous despite being wealthy and privileged. There is no record of a Romanian migration either. Yet the one migratory people, the Magyars, see it normal to project and call others the migrants. Classic. And first they concede that they weren't there first (archaeological evidence disproves them), then they make the claim that those were other peoples, not Romanians. How else do you explain a romance-speaking peoples making up the demographic majority of Transylvania? Wouldn't it just be simpler to accept that they stayed put farming regardless of whatever chieftans wandered in, just as Balts, slavs, and Finns did?

Attached: antonius bonfinius.jpg (1024x768, 135K)

>quotes some hungarian bozos on Wikipedia

Uhh, no sweetie. Romanians weren't 28.4% (lmfao at the degree of accuracy in the 16th century) just because you said so. Cite the relevant census.

holy shit gypos be posting walls of text and calling us butthurt
nobody cares radu

>You still haven't proved that Romanians are Dacians.

It's clear as day. Romanians and Bulgarians have much in common genetically. The simplest explanation is that Romanians are romanised Dacians while Bulgarians are slavicised Thracians. The population structure of Europe has not changed much since the bronze age. But all this goes above whatever fantasies your pea-brain wants to believe. Romania has been continuously populated for literally tens of thousands of years: the oldest human remains in Europe are in Romania (Pestera cu Oase). Now according to your stupid theory a population was completely wiped out, some migrants were the first to settle, and then another people with characteristics of the predecessors somehow migrated in stealthily and became the most numerous. Uh-uh, not gonna fly.

And prove they aren't. Your statement is as stupid as setting out to prove that French are romanised Gauls. It goes without saying from all the available evidence.

Attached: dacian peasant.jpg (540x433, 138K)

it's pretty universally accepted that romanians were shepherds who jacked off in the Carpathians for 2000 years, I don't know why it's even debated, or bothered with.

Because Hungarians like to pretend otherwise and are eternally butthurt.

Attached: boger face.png (1400x861, 307K)

The best thing about this thread is that it's diaspora Niggers arguing about their former homeland

Unironically because the Hungarians say their sheperds jacked off in the Carpathians first.

>Imagine if Germans started to try to rewrite the history of the Netherlands, shouting "we wuz there first!!"
You might imply something new-ish .

it's the fate of diaspora, when you leave, your ethnicity is inherently tied into your identity, and therefore you're defensive about it
every one jacked off in the Carpathians, that's why its a fucking mess

It is indeed a fucking mess but most of it has always been ours.

>there's much more evidence to the contrary?

What evidence?

Don't bother mate, Second genners are beyond reason

>The population structure of Europe has not changed much since the bronze age
lmao prove it. With all the constant migration the opposite is much more plausible.
says the gypsy who started the thread
>always
then why did vlach states in modern romania only emerge in the 14th century rather than anytime before then?

Attached: hungary-mob.png (1114x835, 208K)

>lmao prove it. With all the constant migration the opposite is much more plausible.

And yet it isn't. Read a genetics paper sometime, gyppo. Start with "The evolutionary history of human populations in Europe" by Iosif Lazaridis.

>then why did vlach states in modern romania only emerge in the 14th century rather than anytime before then?

There was one. It's called the Vlaho-Bulgarian empire. Before that they had other rulers too, largely migratory chieftains.

Second, what a weak argument. Why were there no Baltic states? No Finnish state? Does this mean that Balts and Finns didn't exist until their first contact with invaders?

I have never seen a Romanian turn the gypsy card on a foreigner before. We do it to eachother but not others.
Based if you ask me

Attached: 1546287407261.png (1232x752, 1.47M)

There were Romanian voivodeships and principalities throughout modern-day Romania long before the 14th century, most of which persisted until actual nations were established. Besides, a lack of states doesn't imply a lack of people. By your logic, no peoples exist besides those defined by modern borders.

Attached: 800px-FormatiuniPoliticeRomanestiSecolele_IX_XIII.svg.png (800x545, 190K)

>It's called the Vlaho-Bulgarian empire
More like Second Bulgarian Empire. Ivan Ansen was Bulgarian.
We're not talking about "existence", but the claim is made that it was always Romanian land, when Romanians never lorded over it. Just being there doesn't make it yours.

Attached: partitioned-romania-hungary-bulgaria-dobruja-wallachia-moldavia-transylvania.jpg (960x719, 96K)

>Just being there doesn't make it yours
?

You have to be mentally handicapped to take that map seriously

as far as I can tell from image searching, it's from a moldovan newspaper, a stormfront thread, and some nationalist nut blog. He's either baiting, or really, really retarded

Probably a mix of both desu

>Ivan Ansen was Bulgarian.

Big words. Disputed even today.

>Just being there doesn't make it yours.

By your logic Hungary should be French since it was ruled by the Anjou dynasty and many other foreigners too.

Attached: choniates.png (1155x776, 159K)

Attached: 1559921631263.jpg (679x758, 56K)