How do you recognize a failed country, a cardboard alliance, and a civilization in decline?
This is an English adaptation of a text posted in Romanian on Facebook. The translation was fully made by Gemini, with minimal adjustments.
In the context of the Galați drone, let’s recap a bit. The international audience might want to read a news report, such as this one: Russian drone strikes Romania, prompting fierce criticism across Europe.
❶ The Legal Paralysis
First, the Romanian army couldn’t shoot down the Shahed/Geran drones (One-Way Attack UAV) because the law didn’t cover them. Supposedly, you were expected to contact them by radio like a piloted aircraft, and when no one was there to answer, you were left holding the bag, jerking around, because “the law doesn’t specify.” God forbid you shoot it down, because what if Putin gets mad and sues you for damages?
Mind you, this stupidity is pan-European. Latvia also had to amend its legislation, which, surprise surprise, didn’t allow it to defend itself! Moving on to fancier countries, Germany realized it couldn’t do anything even against FPV quadcopter toys that were snooping around airports. I’m convinced that if a little drone like that films a guy butt-naked in Texas, that drone gets shot down the very next second. But we Europeans have respect for property. What if the drone’s owner shows up and takes you to court? So the Germans also amended their federal legislation, and now the police are allowed to jam or shoot the little ones, while the Bundeswehr can intervene much more easily against the big drones.
“Mommy, if Timmy wants to punch me, am I allowed to defend myself?” “I don’t know, sweetie, let’s see what the Code of Good Manners says. If not, let’s wait until a new edition is printed.”
❷ The “Risk” Factor
After which, word has it that “the American Merops anti-drone system is operational in Romania, but it would have been too risky to use in a city.” Of course, just so we don’t risk fragments of the downed drone falling on buildings or people, it’s better not to bother the drone, so it can fall safely wherever it pleases. How idiotic can the military, the politicians, the bureaucrats be? What should the citizens do, buy themselves a Gepard or a Skyranger? Just pitch in through the homeowners’ association.
❸ The Excuse of Time and Peace
Furthermore, the military aviation didn’t have time to intervene during the few minutes the drone was on national territory. Either the drone was too slow compared to an airplane, or the time was still too short (“we didn’t have shoot-down opportunities”), or “the legislation forbids us from firing in such a way that the projectile violates the airspace of a neighboring country, because although Ukraine is at war, Romania is in a state of peace, and we cannot launch a projectile that would end up in Ukraine’s airspace.” Oh my, it might be construed that we’re getting involved in the war! Heaven forbid we upset Putin!
❹ Tactical Incompetence
Not to mention that in areas where drones periodically pass through, I don’t even think a Gepard system would have been necessary; even WWII anti-aircraft artillery could have shot something like this down. There are also some anti-aircraft machine guns.
Naturally, the drone’s target surface is small, so it’s not easy to hit. But it’s worth a shot. “The effectiveness of this type of defense is not guaranteed.” Absolutely. But if you don’t even try, the effectiveness is guaranteed to be zero!
Alas, no, such an approach is not in the national defense strategy. Empty, rigid, moronic heads of idiotic brass. “We got nothing to shoot it with, man.” The army insists that not even the Gepard systems are designed against drones, but against helicopters.
❺ NATO’s Verbal Defense
That’s because the morons at NATO refuse to understand that the best defense is a good offense—meaning the drones must be eliminated while they are still in Ukraine, in Russia, in international waters, wherever they might be, if they have a dangerous trajectory! Nobody is just innocently playing around with a Geran drone in their backyard, in the backyard of the neighbor they attacked, or above the dolphins. But that’s a no-go, because the grand NATO alliance is a machine for “reacting strongly” verbally.
“If Putin continues to be a bad boy, we will react in the strongest possible terms, we’ll show him!” What’s he gonna see, Mark Rutte, old pal? He’s gonna see what a windbag you are, that’s what he’ll see.
“NATO is ready to defend every inch of NATO territory.” With words, or with what? Not even the NATO allies’ “air policing” force aircraft present in Romania dared, in the case of past incidents, to fire in the direction of drones that were not on Romanian territory. (They didn’t fire at all, in fact.) Putin knows for a fact that the entire NATO alliance is shitting its pants out of fear. “Good lord, we wouldn’t want Putin to think we are getting militarily involved on Ukraine’s side.” We’re such brave heroes.
❻ The Absurd Aftermath
The height of ridiculousness: what do the Romanian authorities do after this incident?
“Prosecutors from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Galați Court of Appeal acted ex officio during the night of May 28-29, 2026, regarding the explosion of a military-grade drone of Russian origin in the center of the Galați municipality. In the criminal case opened following the deflagration, prosecutors from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Galați Court of Appeal are conducting investigations regarding the commission of the offense provided by art. 117 para. 2 of the Air Code (Law no. 21/2020), the offense of destruction, as well as attempted aggravated murder,” informs a press release sent by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
Who are you investigating, you bumbling heirs of the Keystone Cops? Oh, just the deed, meaning in rem, not in personam. “Plainte contre X,” as the French say. I wonder who the perpetrator could have been? Take a wild guess, Vladimir Vladimirovich, who could it be?
❼ Conclusion
Tell me when I need to start learning Russian. As long as we can’t shoot down ONE DRONE—not 565 drones, like the Ukrainians do—we might as well just surrender right now.
AFP supposedly asked “the NATO alliance” what can be done to improve the response to such drones. Some unnamed panty-soiling brass hat answered with this and that, but not for a single second did he mention that the drones should be “engaged”—that is, shot down—while they are still outside NATO territory but heading toward it. And then they tell us Putin is losing the war. Putin has already won the war.
“The alliance is working on transmitting calibrated messages to Moscow.” What does that even mean? Like suppositories?
General Minimus’s aberration that “we cannot launch a projectile that would end up in Ukraine’s airspace” doesn’t just spring from the deep well of his own intellect; it reflects NATO’s suicidal doctrine. Only Russian drones are allowed to violate Ukraine; we cannot shoot down a drone menacingly heading toward Romania except on Romanian territory, because otherwise Comrade Czar Putin might get upset! By this logic, no city close enough to the border can be defended, including Iași! The flying contraption reaches the skies above the city in a matter of minutes, where we can’t risk shooting it down, so we let it fall wherever it pleases. In that same city, naturally.
On the other hand, all those who believe this was a deliberate act (and there are plenty of them) are displaying pure conspiracism and navel-gazing, ignoring a basic fact: Russia sends hundreds of flying gifts to Ukraine every day, and some of those that aren’t shot down either wander off in some random-ass direction (the technology is far from perfect), or are spoofed by jamming, meaning they don’t reach their intended target but end up somewhere else entirely. Nobody intentionally targeted Galați. It’s high time we pulled our heads out of our asses.
Finally, believing that Romania will be Putin’s next target is just another hyperbole regarding “our country’s strategic importance.” Romania still exists in one piece not due to the patriotism of its political class (which has been ultra-corrupt since the dawn of time), nor thanks to the patriotism of the soldiers who died like fools (in the First World War because of poor equipment born of corruption, and in the Second because they were sent beyond the Dniester by a war criminal), but because those who wanted to tear a piece off of it have already done so. Those territories are now in the Republic of Moldova and in Ukraine.
Putin won’t attack “NATO” as long as he can’t win the ground war in Ukraine. The current stage is an air war with drones, rockets, and missiles. When he decides to expand a little, he has a shitload of excuses ready regarding Moldova and the Baltic States (“the persecution of the Russian minority”). Romania was not, is not, and will not be on Putler’s menu.
But we lost the war before it even started SOLELY AND EXCLUSIVELY because we decided—THE ENTIRE CARDBOARD ALLIANCE—that we cannot shoot down an aerial threat EXCEPT ON NATO TERRITORY.
(Another piece of news: Kyiv Post: “Foreign policy analyst Paul Goble says Russia’s drone incursion into Romania was a deliberate provocation designed to test NATO unity and pressure Moldova.” Just more talking heads desperately trying to seem relevant. Such “analyses” have absolutely zero value. NATO’s reaction is well known: parole, parole, parole…)