Has there been a more genocidal empire in world history? I don't think there has

And yet these supply shortages magically didn't affect the camp guards or prisoners who had been Allied soldiers. Only civilians who had been repeatedly described as subhuman.

Really sparks the old synaptic valves.

DUDE OPIUM LMFAO

the whole death camp business doesn't even make any sense. Why would they transport civilians hundreds of miles wasting precious war resources just to dispose them in a gas chamber the size of a living room?

> insert /pol/ nazi apologist"nazis dindunuffin" meme here
> aye lmao my way back to my mom's fresh tendies

>taking your slave labourers to where the factories are, doesn't make any sense

>railways are the only form of supply

supplies also came in from trucks, and tonnes of bridges, etc were bombed. bombing supply stores elsewhere affects supplies coming in to camps

plenty of german civilians got typhus, what are you talking about?

You know for an "industrial scale genocide", there sure happened to be a lot of survivors to claim reparations and benefits afterwards. I guess the nazis must have been really lousy or disorganised or something.

Yes, Britain invented concentration camps, not the extermination camps the Nazis used. All it meant was that the undesirable people were concentrated in one area. This was originally just for political enemies of the Nazi Government, but when Himmler took over it was extended to include some Jews, Gypsies, Gays, etc. Actual extermination camps weren't set up until '41

there's literally no proof that they were specifically designed for extermination

There were both work camps and extermination camps. Gross-Rosen an example of the former, while Treblinka and example of the later. The "why" of work camps is obvious.

I assume you are asking why they didn't just shoot the people they wanted to kill when they found them? Well they did initially, but the leadership was concerned with the amount of troops that started to eat their own rifle.

Hence the camp system, which had as few people as possible directly involved.

>le germans are hyper efficient robots maymay

Yeah, they were lousy and disorganised.

>Lets just ship these people to the middle of nowhere, with no living facilities where they mysteriously vanish.

Proportionally Mongols are leagues ahead of the Brits.

>ship

Do you know how many people are estimated to have died in the war? 60 million, including about 20 million Russians and 4 million Germans. Its impossible to count specifically the number of victims who were Jewish and exactly how or where they had died. The responsibliity Katyn massacre alone was not determined until 1991. For all we know, many of the Jews could have been killed by Stalin or sent to Gulags, or simply died in famines, or immigrated to Palestine, and the soviets could have pinned their disappearance on the germans.

>the British invented the concentration camp
When will this meme end?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment

m8 we have some delivery manifests for people sent to these camps.

Just stop. Holocaust denial is just embarrassing.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-C0509-0049-006,_KZ_Treblinka,_Wehrmacht-Frachtbrief.jpg

>Idiotic boers attacking supplies intended for the camps are what made conditions so bad
Pretty sure the ineptitude & callousness of the officers running the camps is what contributed primarily to the abject conditions that lead to tens of thousand of women & children dying.

what does that prove? the biggest of those camps at Auschwitz only held around 10 thousand workers and if so many died why are there so many survivors and more importantly where are all of the bodies??

You are still confusing extermination camps with the more general concentration camps.

That particular paperwork is from Sobibor, which was an extermination camp with living facilities for only a few hundred Sonderkommando.

>mfw third worlders get jealous about the largest and most supreme empire in all of human history

The French

Belgium isnt France

British colonialism involved peacefully trading with whoever let them then allying with these trade partners when the Mughals or whoever attacked them.

Maybe it is wrong for a good old redcoat to arrive to help out some allied village and bayonet a rapist through the stomach, maybe they should have gone through the trouble of capturing them alive and sending them to hotel-jail for 6 months like they would in modern Sweden, but it is understandable, right?

I'm not sure why liberals trip over themselves to defend these people, they don't seem to understand that for good to prevail it must forge itself through personal sacrifice into an unstoppable military machine fueled by the divinely ordained will of the Queen. That is the only way to surpass those who have made it their ambition to impose their will on others.

just about every other european empire to begin with also the USA, russia and the japanese.

>british invented concentration camps, you know.

actually they didnt, the term perhaps but similar camps had already been used by the spanish and the americans in cuba, the phillipines and the american west and would be used by the americans again in the phillipines at the same time as they were used by the british in south africa

who did they genocide?

Yes, literally almost every other major empire in modern history.

I'm not saying it's a particularly high bar to set, but it was one of the most benevolent empires of the past few hundred years (and that's not to say the ones that came before were any better, just that that's apples and oranges).

The proto-French empire.
It was horrible

not really, they were less genocidal to the natives than the Romans to the Gauls of France or Iberians, Celts and Celtiberians of Spain.

The regions that had large population densities still have native majorities, like Guatemala, Peru or Bolivia.
Mexico was the most important Spanish colony and most people are mixed race and about 50% native.
There are still millions of Quechua, Aymara, Maya, Guarani and Nahuatl speakers, and we have grammars of native languages made by Jesuits centuries ago.

in comparison, much later in history, the Brits were treating Bushmen in South Africa and Abos in Australia as pretty much non humans.
Americans were still lynching blacks in the 60s and the apartheid in South Africa lasted until the mid 90s.

>the apartheid in South Africa lasted until the mid 90s.

You think Apartheid started post ww2 but in reality Apartheid was pretty much set in stone years before that. Like people weren't living with ~43 years of that shit but much much longer then 43 years with it building up heavier over time until it went full blow formalized as Apartheid.

Congo free state!=Belgian Congo

>concentration camps and extermination camps are the same thing

Am I even on Veeky Forums?

To be honest Belgian Congo was one of the worst colonies out of the bunch.

'the worst' is open for interpretation, but the Belgian government never chopped limbs of anyone or was directly responsible for genocide