If Holocaust denier believe that something that happend only 70 years ago...

youtube.com/watch?v=DXcge5YUPLo
revisedhistory.org/investigation-historical-dating.htm#

holocaust deniers see a motivation for lying and examples of it. Myself i just want to forget the whole thing as it has clearly been fabricated to some extent but at the same time it has to be true to some extent.

Theory i like the most is that since concentration camps were founded at the same time as operation barbarossa was executed, the lebenraum was supposed to be for jews segregated(?eristää?) from germany.

War turns bad and you cant afford feeding thousands of jews so you execute/starve them to death rather than risk them joining resistance groups (yes there were many and they were a real problem) Also criminals and rebels were sent to concentration camps so i wonder many testimonies are speaking of them being executed. I have to point out that many jews survived the holocaust. and i am not talking about the most recent ones in the camps, there probably even weren't any new ones at the camp when they were liberated by us & ussr. All pictures show skinny underfed people (this might be propaganda cherrypicking but i dont think so) turning into something like that takes time and still some food as you would die in a week without any food still looking somewhat like you started like and in 3 days without water i think. This alone proves that as 'evil' nazis were, they were trying to keep the jews alive even in the end without many/any resources. And you tell me they kept them alive just to kill them? Even if they knew they were going to get 'liberated' soon?

and what comes to all other history yes in could have been fabricated also as everybody has heard the phrase 'victors write the history'. but other than that there isn't many examples or motivations for lying.

>This alone proves that as 'evil' nazis were, they were trying to keep the jews alive even in the end without many/any resources. And you tell me they kept them alive just to kill them?

You may be right, but another theory is they intended to exterminate them by working them to death, keeping them on a starvation ration to extract as much use from them as possible.

That's an umbrella pine cone not a pineapple.

You're talking about Jews. They're deceptive and self-deceptive enough to claim that every people who they come into contact with has an anti-Semitism problem.

>"...the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will the situation in Europe be after this war."-Mar 6, 1942

>"The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 per cent can be used for forced labor."-Mar 27, 1942

>""Short shrift is made of the Jews in all eastern occupied areas. Tens of thousands of them are liquidated."-april 29,1942

>"At bottom, however, I believe both the English and the Americans are happy that we are exterminating the Jewish riff-raff."-Dec 13, 1942

>"We are now definitely pushing the Jews out of Berlin. ... On the Jewish question, especially, we have taken a position from which there is no escape."-March 2, 1943

>"[Hitler] approved of my measures and specifically ordered me to make Berlin entirely free of Jews."-March 9, 1943

>"There is therefore no other recourse left for modern nations except to exterminate the Jew...."-may 13, 1943

what did he mean by this?

A fair point. The archeological narrative constantly veers in wild directions as they discover the next disparate piece of evidence.

I had to learn about the holocaust in an English unit called "History and Memory" where we had to read a torturously bad, non-linear series of holocaust personal family investigation vignettes by a neurotic Jew with the takeaway being that even if memories don't line up with each other or history, they're true.

I mean, it sounds like an antisemitic parody, but it's true. We read bad but critically praised postmodern experimental fiction by a Jew about the holocaust where the conclusion is that you have to believe the Jews. It was also mandatory reading across the state, so he would have made tens of thousands a year at least off it.

>"I also want to talk to you, quite frankly, on a very grave matter. Among ourselves it should be mentioned quite frankly, and yet we will never speak of it publicly. Just as we did not hesitate on June 30th, 1934 to do the duty we were bidden, and stand comrades who had lapsed, up against the wall and shoot them, so we have never spoken about it and will never [p. 65] speak of it. It was that tact which is a matter of course and which I am glad to say, is inherent in us, that made us never discuss it among ourselves, never to speak of it. It appalled everyone, and yet everyone was certain that he would do it the next time if such orders are issued and if it is necessary. I mean the clearing out of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish race. It's one of those things it is easy to talk about - "The Jewish race is being exterminated", says one party member, "that's quite clear, it's in our program - elimination of the Jews, and we're doing it, exterminating them." And then they come, 80 million worthy Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. Of course the others are vermin, but this one is an A-1 Jew. Not one of all those who talk this way has witnessed it, not one of them has been through it. Most of you must know what it means when 100 corpses are lying side by side, or 500 or 1000. To have stuck it out and at the same time - apart from exceptions caused by human weakness - to have remained decent fellows, that is what has made us hard. This is a page of glory in our history which has never been written and is never to be [p. 66] written, for we know how difficult we should have made it for ourselves, if - with the bombing raids, the burdens and the deprivations of war - we still had Jews today in every town as secret saboteurs, agitators and trouble-mongers. We would now probably have reached the 1916/17 stage when the Jews were still in the German national body."-Posen Speech. Oct 4, 1943

what did he mean by this?

Was he writing liquidate, does that mean the same thing in German as in English and is the diary verified/could it have been tinkered with by soviets?

its pretty amazing how so many people survived the death camps for years on end

>"If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!"-Jan 31, 1939

>"And we say that the war will not end as the Jews imagine it will, namely with the uprooting of the Aryans, but the result of this war will be the complete annihilation of the Jews."-Jan 30, 1942

what did he mean by this?

Lets be honest here. What work possibly they could have been doing that would have been profitable? Then again all pictures show work-aged men. Now to think i've never heard of any statement of them working on anything but jew lampshades. What was their job?

Now that I think of it, we also learned the Nazi lampshade line from a Sylvia Plath in English, which was presented as fact. The history teacher also told us that Hitler was the most evil man in history, despite him obviously being less malevolent and causing less suffering than others in history.

>guy who caused the bloodiest war in human history isnt really that bad!

you guys really are something else lol

...

>caused
Hol up, Britain had something to do with that.
Mao and Stalin had massive death tolls too.

portonially speaking it wasn't. There have been 'world wars' where a bigger portion of humankind died fighting each other.

also this:
>war happened because this one guy did this.

...

>There have been 'world wars'

no there wasnt. WW2 is the bloodiest war in human history

>Hol up, Britain had something to do with that.

No they didnt. Hitler started the war. Why do you choose to lie and draw the line at britain as if Hitler didnt just invade Poland?

...

Britain and France turned a petty territorial dispute between two neighbouring countries into a world war

>Go to Der Spiegel 1992
>Can't find that source, even in German
Hmmmmmm
spiegel.de/suche/index.html?suchbegriff=James Baker Hitler&suchzeitraum=1995&toDate=31.12.1994
Be my guest if you wanna look up yourself.

Hitler started the war when he invaded Poland, stop choosing to be retarded

>DUDE FAKE QUOTES LMAO

You said it. It's not hard to fake quotes.

Oh the "liquidate" here clearly means "make sure they live in comfort"
>"The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 per cent can be used for forced labor."-Mar 27, 1942

>DUDE I GOT CAUGHT LYING TO PROVE MY POINT WHICH IS SOMEHOW A POINT FOR ME!

I more meant that cucking the German old conservative elite and plunging Germany into hell meant that zee Germans would turn to someone more hardcoar and unwilling to capitulate than their prior elite who unquestionably did nothing wrong compared to the allies and still had Germany fucked for it. From my flimsy reading of history, I get the impression that hitler was an ambitious guy and may well have been scheming world domination (like Britain, America and the SU at the time).

Also when he invaded Poland he was reuniting the German people. What were parts of Germany doing inside Poland to begin with? Cockroach Britain.

I wasn't being smarmy, I'm genuinely curious on this source.

you are wrong though. Shitty neo-nazi infographs arent you "reading history" user

I'm skeptical because ausrotten gets translated as exterminate in I think Himmler(?)'s speech to the ss. And that looks more to me as a non German speaker like root out.

Okay, where am I wrong?

>I'm genuinely curious on this source.

youre genuinely just some shitposting stormfag.

>HURR HE DINDU NUFFIN THE SOVIETS MADE IT ALL UP!

-hitler did nothing wrong
-hitler was no different in his ambitions of world domination like the US or Britain or the USSR
-hitler was invading poland to "reunite germans"
-general attitude that hitler dindu nuffin and it was britain that picked on them

you clearly have no idea what you are talking about and are some 20 year old from /b/ who got sucked into stormfaggotry on /pol/

Pro-tip: That "ausrotten" thing is your typical disinformation.

In the context of Himmler's speach there is no possible alternative meaning.

>Also when he invaded Poland he was reuniting the German people
So instead of debating with the Poles like he "did" with the Czechs in the Munich agreement, he instead decided to offer an Ultimatum?

He started a singular war against poland. World war started when france and britain joined. hitler even tried to prevent bigger conflict by sending a peace treaty to the british.

>The full text of Hitler’s “Appeal for Peace and Sanity” speech, made before the Reichstag on July 19, 1940, following the fall of France. In that speech, Hitler once again offered unconditional peace to Britain. This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace.

Operation barbarossa. Big operation, rusing desperately straight to the capital of strongest enemy. Im fairly confident after the fall of russia there would have been another peace offer for britain.

quora.com/Did-Hitler-try-to-make-peace-with-Churchill-several-times

Yes, remember the lamp shades, the soap, the electrocuted Jews, the drowned Jews, hundreds at a time, and also that 6 million Jews died and 5 million non-jews (can't have more non-jews die than jews). These were all presented as fact at one point or another. I wonder why so many people are skeptical of the official story.

Was he also reuniting the German people when he was given the Sudetenlands at the Munich conference (with French and British approval) only to annex the rest of the Czech state, despite it only having 5% German population, 6 months later?

Pro tip; google 'The Munich agreement" you dumb tard.

>hitler even tried to prevent bigger conflict by sending a peace treaty to the british.

not this shit again.

HITLER STARTED THE WAR WHEN HE INVADED POLAND WITH THE SOVIET UNION. Theres no way for you to dance around this stormfag

You can't really trust Hitler's word when he decided to invade Denmark and Norway, then Yugoslavia. Last I checked Yugoslavia's population was less than 5% German.

>HITLER STARTED THE WAR WHEN HE INVADED POLAND WITH THE SOVIET UNION.

Nice cold war era propaganda you got there, m8. Soviet forces moved into Poland following Germany's invasion in an attempt to protect the Polish people from fascists, people executed at Katyn were in league in nazis and were sentenced to death for their crimes against Polish people.

geez what an idiot.

War was already ongoing and norway was giving germany resources. Also it was a strategic blockage for landtroops landing from atlantic sea. Soo... it wasn't for people..?

Nice falseflag/bait you got there there. Katyn massacre was German-Russian collaboration.

I just find this so laughable, you can only even begin to see this as a point if you are clueless. 1940s German isn't some esoteric lost language.

Thousands of German historians have studied the Holocaust, pretty much every single historian working in other languages that studies Nazi Germany and the Holocaust can speak German fluently, it's pretty much a prerequisite for the job. The idea of "hurr durr maybe they have mistranslated this and misunderstood it because that is what I read on Mongolian kitting site hurr" is beyond ridiculous.

>Soviet forces moved into Poland following Germany's invasion in an attempt to protect the Polish people from fascists, people executed at Katyn were in league in nazis and were sentenced to death for their crimes against Polish people.

(you)

>the punitive treaties against germany(which didn't even start the great war)
>treaties signed in good faith
pick one

>geez what an idiot.

gees what a none argument

Honestly people go really light on the USSR's role in starting WWII. Stalin's responsibility for the conflict is slightly smaller than that of Hitler.

Hitler is the drunk driver who runs over small children, Stalin is the guy who encouraged him to drink and drive and then lent the car.

Is this bait?

>War was already ongoing and norway was giving germany resources. Also it was a strategic blockage for landtroops landing from atlantic sea. Soo... it wasn't for people..?
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here for. the Qurora that user posted says Hitler had no interest in controlling Non-German people. So why target Yugoslavia? Resources? Then why not go for the Chromium in Turkey, as well?

Argument was told already. You just said no and carried on with caps lock. Thats why you are an idiot.
see

You mean like the Anglo-German naval agreement which Germany signed in 1935 with the UK (Without even asking the French), despite it being literally contradictory with the Versailles, and then broke in april 1939? Or maybe the Munich agreement they signed in 1938 and then broke half a year later?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Yugoslavia
They were enemies due to conflict with italy.

Again, this isnt an argument. Your point about "hitler wanted peace with britain!" is a bullshit lie you got called out on and all you can do is call everyone who actually knows history an idiot.

>Hitler then pressured Yugoslavia to join as well.
>Upon hearing news of the coup in Yugoslavia, Hitler called his military advisers to Berlin on 27 March. On the same day as the coup he issued Führer Directive 25 which called for Yugoslavia to be treated as a hostile state.[15] Hitler took the coup as a personal insult, and was so angered that he was determined, in his words, "to destroy Yugoslavia militarily and as a state" (Jugoslawien militärisch und als Staatsgebilde zu zerschlagen),[16] and to do so "without waiting for possible declarations of loyalty of the new government".[17]
So you didn't even read the article you shared? The article talks about Italy being pushed in by Greece, not Yugoslavia.

Not him, but your argument was "Britain should not intervene, when her allies are attacked and wait until Germans cut the whole salami of Europe". That's not very "rational" way of through.

>no there wasnt. WW2 is the bloodiest war in human history
>brainwashing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War
And probably many other .

Repeat after me. Anti-antisemitism does not need citations.

Get on the helicopter

your point is a bullshit lie you are being called an idiot for a reason.

also bullshit lie isn't a valid counterargument if you didn't know already.

my argument is valid until you prove its not and you still havent.

"Only" 8 million people died in the thirty years way, as opposed to ~60 or so million in world war 2. Dunno if you're retarded, shitposting or both.

I proved its not valid, but you never replied to any of my posts so I'll ask you again. Explain to me what the Munich agreement was, what was its result and its aftermath.

I'll wait.

are you fucking retarded or something? konzentrationslager (arbeitslager) and vernichtungslager are not the same, it's 2 different concepts.

everyone who was somewhat able to work was put into an konzentrationslager and worked to fucking death. of course those people were fed, they were probably also treated because a disease outbreak would be bad for both inmates and guards/personnel. the reason jews were kept alive was slave labor. the jews that weren't able to work.. crippled, old, children, were killed instantly.

>my argument is valid until you prove its not and you still havent.

youre shitposting just like you faggots always do. Why do you think this dumb shit is going to trick people who actually know history?

shortly
dictionary.com/browse/munich-pact
>Munich Pact

noun

the pact signed by Great Britain, France, Italy, and Germany on September 29, 1938, by which the Sudetenland was ceded to Germany: often cited as an instance of unwise and unprincipled appeasement of an aggressive nation.

what about it?

Most of Holocaust "deniers" don't deny the Holocaust itself, but the 6000000 joos figure.
Of course there is always some old Stormfront farts who hate Jews and believe that Jesus hated Jews etc.
And yeah, like other Anons said, it's surprising how ideologically-undriven stuff gets questioned so little.

Do you have problems reading or did you just ignore the part of the question which you can't answer? The aftermath user, what was the aftermath?

yes, but again, what was the job they were doing that would have been profitable compared to just killing? Didn't find anything specific after short googling and didn't really have interest since it wasn't my point in the first place

The systematic destruction of jews was called "Endlösung der Judenfrage", literally "Final Solution to the Jewish Question". Everything in nazi vernacular is code. Doubt the soviets had to tinker with it at all.

"Liquidate" in German is "liquidieren" (that's the infinitive). It's the exact same word with the same meaning, though I would say we use it more in context of, say, an assasination than mass murder. "Vernichten", "Ausrotten", "Tilgen" would be verbs that fit better (all those mean "exterminate" in English).

Almost no one survived the death camps, most survivors were in KZs (Konzentrationslager - forced labor camp)..

>Most of Holocaust "deniers" don't deny the Holocaust itself, but the 6000000 joos figure.
Incorrect, deniers deny both intent and scale. They are willing to acknowledge interment of Jews, but the resonsibility for deaths is either placed on allies or just handwaved away by saying "war is war".

You are making this hard for me goddamnit. why cant you just tell me?

czechs were annexed by poland hungary and germany later on?

No, that's a communist user. As you can see, their intelligence is similar to fascists.

my fucking NIGGA; thats the first thing I did

why is it always fucking murricans that come up with the most retarded shit? I wonder if there are many German holocaust deniers on /pol/

Pretty much. This is a fun game, let's play on. By the way, I like how Germany was named last.

>"This is my last territorial demand in Europe"
This is a quote by a certain individual pertaining the Sudetenland. Can you guess who he was?

>what is proportionality?

"The reduction of population in the German states was typically 25% to 40%.[81] Some regions were affected much more than others.[82] For example, Württemberg lost three-quarters of its population during the war.[83] In the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas, an estimated two-thirds of the population died.[84] The male population of the German states was reduced by almost half."

You can bet some wars in ancient times were even more catastrophic. WW2 was not a picnic but given the world population it was certainly not the most devastating war.

countries were named in the timeframe they acted.

I guess it's supposed to be hitler's. Is there proof of it? :)

Who is Adolf Hitler for $500, Alex.

I'm not even German, just know some basic German from studying it in school.
Also basic fact-checking is pretty much a neccessity now for me. I used to be a /pol/tard but then the retards showcased some photo that I was skeptical about so did some research. Turns out it was faked, tried explaining to the /pol/acks why it was wrong. Started claiming my citations/sources/authors are Jews.

ausrotten, vernichten, tilgen, ausmerzen, ausradieren.. they all mean the same goddamn thing: to genocide

>I guess it's supposed to be hitler's. Is there proof of it? :)
Just a public speech he made.

bingo

>MUH PROPORTIONALITY
Since when is "proportionality" the measure of something being bloodier than another thing? Is killing 20 people in a village of 100 more bloodier than killing 10 thousand people in a city of 100 thousand? What kind of logic is that?

Besides that, I'm going out on limb and straight up claiming that even proportionally world war 2 killed a higher % of the world population than did the 30 years war (which also lasted much longer)

I haven't been following this discussion, I'm not the guy you're arguing with, but you reminded me of a cool fact.

Although WW2 had some pretty staggeringly high casualty numbers, proportionally it was actually far less deadly than, say, the Napoleonic Wars. At least for soldiers. There were just so many people involved in logistics and rear-echelon jobs in WW2 that never saw combat that they water down the casualty numbers.

what did he mean by this?

>This is the last territorial demand I have to make in Europe, but it is a demand on which I will not yield.

>The hardest problem I found, my fellow citizens, was Polish-German relations. We faced the danger here of steering ourselves into, let us say, fanatical hysteria. The danger existed that in this case a conception like inherited enmity would gain possession of our peoples as well as the Polish people.

>We do not have to expect anything from each other. We recognize this. We are two peoples. They shall live. One cannot annihilate the other. I recognize this and we must see it: A State of 33,000,000 people will always strive for an outlet to the sea.

>To be sure, there is here one pre-condition -- it cannot be admitted that one party should say: I do not want to fight you any more and therefore I offer to cut my armaments down to 35 per cent, and that the other party should say from time to time: We will fight again when it suits us.

>Somewhere, my fellow countrymen, there is a limit -- a limit where yielding must cease, because it would otherwise become a harmful weakness and I would have no right to maintain a place in German history if I were simply to renounce 10,000,000 without caring about them. I would then have no moral right to be Fuehrer of the German people.

>In the first place, however, I speak of Germans. For these Germans I have now spoken and now given assurances that I am no longer willing to look on quietly and passively as this lunatic believes he can simply mishandle 3,500,000 human beings.

greatspeeches.net/2013/05/adolf-hitler-no-more-territorial-demands.html?m=1

it is a fascinating speech.

since it seems like you're genuinely curious and not just some contrarian fag I'll explain

most of the work done was construction work, metal work, or similiar things. people were building roads, building railway tracks or simply building parts or making raw materials, for weapons, transportation devices, infrastructure.. inmates were woken up at 5AM and started working at 6AM, usually for 11 hours per day.

but the labor also served a second, very important purpose. indeed so many people were actively killed that it was simply unfeasible to have everyone executed asap. there was not enough space for bodies, not enough space in the gas chambers, not enough space in the crematorium. having more than half of the jews work themselves to death freed up a lot of space and production in the Vernichtungslagern (deathcamps).

this is also the reason why many jews, communists, crippled, roma or homosexuals were shot/gassed by CO2 in cars (this was abandoned after a year iirc), or killed in any other barbaric matter. there simply was not enough capacity in the gas chambers and the ovens to kill that many people At Once. it was a long process.

questions led you an a journey to find the truth. you took the easy path, only to realize that, make a 360 degrees (tm) turnaround and question the sceptic. I am proud of you user.

/pol/ is like a shitty drug. a lot of people try meth and never stop for as long as they live. for them it is pure bliss, for an outsider it is reprehensible. never be that one idiot who gets stuck with a shitty drug.

Is it illegal to question the black death? Will you go to jail for it? If not then it's probably real

>heard of any statement of them working on anything but jew lampshades
Are you being quite honest here my man? Jewish slave labor was used for absolutely everything, uniforms, ammunition, ROCKETS, etc. That's why they were evacuated west instead of just killed when the Soviets advanced, they were needed to produce everything.