Is it fair to say that the Holocaust was not a deliberate extermination but rather a tragedy caused by willful...

Is it fair to say that the Holocaust was not a deliberate extermination but rather a tragedy caused by willful negligence and lack of resources?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squad#United_States
huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/us-colombia-cover-up-atro_b_521402.html
holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.pt/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

after the trial it can be said it was not from negligence

No.

why?

because they were all found guilty of that very thing

No.

Where is the proof it happend ?

Sincerey,
/pol/

Depends. If you believe the Wehrmacht merely slipped, fell and landed on Poland you could also assume that the Holocaust was an accident. If you're a reasonable person however that might not hold up to closer examination.

>This trial will not be operating according to traditional rules of evidence
Damn, guess the Nazis really did gas the 20 million

was the nazi regime a traditional regime in your opinion?

>most people involved were acquitted or jailed for a handful of years

What did the evil torture kangaroo court mean by this?

The didn't want the Germans to start proving how they didn't intend to start the war. It was about their war crimes, not about anything else. The Germans wanted to question even well established facts derailing the whole trial.

There was plenty of evidence.

I don't understand
The idea I'm proposing can't be true because they were found guilty of it?

Did the Wehrmacht do the Holocaust? I thought it was the SS

Has this board rejected Nazis entirely?

Wehrmacht was heavily involved in the extermination. Same with Hiwis.

Yes. They cannot be innocent, because they were found guilty.

Yes, the Nazis accidentally tripped, fell over and exterminated people. The Nazis accidentally conquered Europe when all they were really doing is going for walks.

>There was plenty of evidence.

Yeah, like all those bodies who were proven to have been gass- oh wait
Or those gas chambers who were definitely used to kill Jews and not for delou- oops
Or that chimney built after the war that isn't even connected to the main- hmm

I never said they were innocent
I think you misunderstand my post
I'll explian a bit further
Internment camps were commonplace during ww2. The US used them, russia used them, basically everyone used them. But Germany had interned a population they not only didn't care about, the actually held a level of disdain for, I acknowledge that this is a crime against humanity, but it really isn't much worse than what other countries were doing to minority groups. I propose that the holocaust was caused, not by a deliberate genocide, but rather a lack of care for large populations that they interned combined with a lack of resources because they were being used in the war effort, and widespread plague in the internment camps.

I do not propose the nazis were innocent, but I do propose that much of our current political agendas are based on opposing a long-dead ideology, the opposition of the ideology is legitimized by a false narrative.

>trips
>accidentally round up millions of gypsies, Jews, Russians, Poles, Roman Catholics and other "undesirables"
>falls
>accidentally start executing them en masse
Fuck dude, sorry mang. It was just an accident bro!

Where did I say that?

In your OP.
>T-The Nazis didn't exterminate them, i-it was just l-lack of resources!

willful negligence places blame

Yeah I find willfull negligence is a good way for describing ordered executions of millions of people.

Ok I don't this to sound accusatory, I am willing to be convinced
But can I see something proving they ordered the execution of millions of people

Primary source documents showing plans for extermination.

Actual death sites that hadn't been destroyed.

Thousands upon thousands of confessions.

Thousands upon thousands of witnesses.


How can you prove WWII happened? It could all have been fabricated.

Did 9/11 happen? It's easy to Photoshop a building.

You really are a dumb cunt

No that's the Holodomor.

I don't want to tell you to do the work for me, but I'm going to. Can you show the document or accounts that convinced you? I think what I propsed holds up against legitimate accounts from both sides. But is it really hard to believe that people from a marginalized and oppressed group have an adjusted idea of the past and the forces at play? Also people with financial incentives could lie to support a narrative that will only benefit them, writing a book about their experiences, and changing a few minor details because people remember things how they want to remember things.

I'm not a nazi, but I think the opposition the "fascism" and pointing to nazism happen way too much in modern politics and I don't think it's legitimate.

>not... deliberate... but... willful

So what was with the whole mass shooting thing? Were they just trying to shoot the lice?

>round up millions of slav soldiers
>your post war plans for europe have no place for them
>"accidentally" forgot to feed them
We didn't du naffin

I am willing to be convinced but I need to see hard evidence of it. I've looked and haven't found concrete evidence.

My interest in this topic comes from it's use in modern politics, not because of outright denial.

I find it easier to believe in a constructed narrative from war-time propaganda, than an outright evil government. people make mistakes, poor decisions, and are subjected to greed but things of this scale are never outright malevolent for the sake of malevolence, people don't want to kill eachother, people don't enjoy torturing other people, but people do want power.

It seems like you guys have a lot of arguements prepared for /pol/ invasions but I'm trying to have an objective discussion here

If the videos the Einsatzgruppen themselves shot isn't good enough evidence for you I don't think anything will be

>how they didn't intend to start the war
Yeah they rolled into Poland by mistake.

If you think footage of shooting a handful of people during wartime is enough evidence to confirm all the crimes the nazis are accused of, then you have to be a fucking idiot

I do not deny the holocaust, I do not deny the millions of deaths, I deny the narrative that each and every nazi soldier was so blinded by ideology that they would willingly go village to village, murdering every single person along the way or rounding them up to be slowly murdered. It just makes no sense, why waste the ammo and energy while your you are fighting a war on all sides?

So basically mao was agreat dude he just didnt really grasp the whole agriculture buisness

you are attacking people on your side

>I deny the narrative that each and every nazi soldier was so blinded by ideology that they would willingly go village to village, murdering every single person along the way or rounding them up to be slowly murdered
Literally no one is claiming that though

What concrete evidence? Do you want to see a self-taped video of Hitler saying "ok, guys, this is some new Holocaust footage, don't forget to subscribe and click on the description link for our guys' latest Auschwitz video, thanks for watching!"?
The types of evidence for the Holocaust are the ones used for History in general. If you apply those same standards to most historical events, they couldn't be "concretely" proved either.

I don't know enough about all that, but from what I do know, you gotta be a pretty cool dude to kill as many people as he did and still be immortalised because of the love for you and your legacy

Exactly
why are nazis brought up so often today?
If they were remembered as a zealous, totalitarian, soldiers thatlost the largest industrial war in history rather than evil, comic book villains who were all murderers and have no excuse for not trying to topple the regime in any way they could.

so you don't claim that nazis were evil murderers who used modern industrial technology to carry out one of the largest mass exterminations?

>so you don't claim that nazis were evil murderers who used modern industrial technology to carry out one of the largest mass exterminations?
There seems to be a disconnect in your mind where you equate German with Nazi, the vast majority of them weren't even party members

We do have a letter from 1943 from himmler saying that 1.2 million jews have died
I doubt it was a plan from hitler though and jews werent gassed

>I doubt it was a plan from hitler though
You're right, it was too effective to be Hitlers idea

It seems you have a cultural disconnect where you think people don't believe that germany, as a nation, was the enemy during ww2. Nazi germany was a well-oiled machine that used all of its manpower and, while there were dissenters, the vast majority of the nation at least passively supported the party.

You do realize that germany isnt responsible for the war and that Hitler was an incredible leader

Oh of course, never forget the octodecillion Germans that 209 Poles murdered in Danzig of course

stop, that's not what this thread is about

Sieg Heil!!!

1 guy who was tortured said he gassed 6000 people a day without any emotion in a matter of fact way and even told ridiculous and outrageous atrocities during the process.

In ANY other historical context atrocities like this are usually dismissed as exaggeration and propaganda yet because of a kangaroo trial meant to de Prussify Germany its taken as religious fact or else punishable by law.

All of this is in the context of the atrocity propaganda office of GB and Germany during wwi AND proposals for a show trial to place the blame on Wilhelm in order to kill Prussianism.

It’s pretty reasonable to raise an eyebrow at the holocaust on those grounds alone and would be questioned or dismissed in any other context.

no

there's no reason to point fingers on "who started the war" just concede that the invasion of poland was the official start. You could get as reductionist as you want and point to the end of ww1 as the the reason for ww2 or you could go as far back as the age of imperialism, but there's no point. As for hitler being a good leader; while he was a successful politician and reformer, would a "good leader" have that outcome of ww2

Kind of. A democracy votes to grant emergency powers to one man for an indefinite period of time. This has happened since Rome.

>Democracy votes
Pretty hard to do that in a democratic fashion when you've expelled or arrested the opposition

>1 guy who was tortured
Who?
And it was perfectly possible to gas 6000 people a day.

It's not reasonable if you actually know sources.

Yeah looking at context and reasons is reductionist. Too much thinking and researching involved.
Most other leaders would not have had ww2 as it played out in our world but..
Germany would be an unliveable shithole of starvation, decadence, perversion and jewry with a likely communist takeover.

>Thousands of survivors alive today despite the official story saying they were gassed upon arriving to the camps.

Thousands of witnesses to the angel at the Mons too.

>your post war plans
>a post war plan

That plan existed but was far from finalized. Even Rosenberg hated the plan and he’s the chief philosopher of the party.

if you are ever arguing for germany in ww2, it is best to concede some points to the rabid, hyper-sensitive, hostile opposition. it's small victories, not a massive sweeping one. the more you defend the nazis the more you will be attacked

I don't think you get my point. I'm saying that if you apply the standards of evidence you have regarding the Holocaust to most historical events, these would lack "concrete evidence" too.
Or do you think that say, the Holodomor or the Armenian Genocide have a type of evidence that is more concrete, whatever you mean by that, than the Holocaust? If you think so, I'd like to hear what that type of evidence is.

The einstatzgruppen is different than the gas chambers tho.

Way way more evidence for the post polish invasion atrocities against poles and Jews. But also evidence that shows after 1941 they wound down and ended killings in favor of labor for the long war effort.

The trail for rewinding up the killings in the form of gas chambers is very different and used different evidence and goes against the logic of of the first round.

Plans don't need to be finalized to be acted upon. There was a tacit understanding that slav population needed to be reduced and that's exactly what they were doing.

I seriously question holodomor and the armenian genocide as well. The idea of race based extermination is a little to far fetched. I generally dont believe in humans being straight up evil on mass scales, i do believe im unchecked greed and destructive vindictiveness.

>Thousands of witnesses to the angel at the Mons too.

Not really. "The World Undone" actually talks about this. Nobody has actually been able to find a single account by a soldier saying that he'd seen an angel. It's just something that was made up by the British press.

>I seriously question holodomor and the armenian genocide as well.

Then you're fucking retarded. Those events are documented to such a degree that you might as well be asking if the Battle of Gettysburg actually happened.

>than an outright evil government
Think about a typical stormfag. Who is responsible for all the evil in the world? Jews. Who wants to get rid of the white race? Jews. Who rules the world? Jews.
Now imagine a government led by people who experienced WW1, who killed and saw their friends being killed. Who after WW1 brutally crushed a communist uprising killing workers, women and probably children.
For them the Jews are the ultimate evil, they are like parasites who feed on their host nations. Those children one day will become adults and continue their nefarious ways. Let's not forget that the Nazis fully believed that Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a real Jewish plan of world domination.

They thought they were the good guys.

I question the narratives not the event. I am not saying these tragedies didnt happen, i am saying that these tragedies are capitalized on by people trying to control you through ypur emotions

Ive already stated im not a Nazi, jesus christ, didnt mean to offend you so hard

The mass killings in the East started after Barbarossa (Babi Yar, Ponary).

No.

You don't seem to be making any real point with this.

I'm explaining to you how it was possible for the German government to be so evil. Like I said, they thought they are doing the good thing because Jews were the final boss of Aryan Europe. Modern day neo-Nazis believe the same.

SS orchestrated it, Wehrmacht participated

You don't seem to understand that the gas chambers were primarily intended for those deemed physically incapable of working, i.e the very young, the very old and the disabled

>The idea of race based extermination is a little to far fetched.

Are you retarded? Go read an history book. This kind of thing happened and still happen.

You don't accidentally execute shoot of people

Fuck sake
You don't accidentally shoot thousands of people*

Sorry, misread your post, im currently doing stuff while monitoring the thread. Thats how i see a radical government being born, but not a nation of murderers. My goal in this argument is to take away people basing modern beliefs off of what the nazis did and didnt do, now more than ever, we need to make objectively good decisions for future and not adherr to some archaic and pointless code. This might not seem like a huge issue, but people reference and accuse others of being "fascists" on both sides of all modern politics when werr all just kinda fucked because money in politics has set up a world where were all going to lose while the rich keep winning. I tend yo vote blue im the US and the dems are the worst offenders, liberals feel so fucking sorry for people they never wronged. We are all so stuck in the past, and while we can learn from it, dont base your politics on some unrelated tragedy from 80 years ago. Thats why i want this whole notion of good and evil to stop, we have tp check greed where we it pops up, nazi germany got greedy, imperial japan got greedy, but draggong eachother through the mud accomplishes nothing, especially when its about manufactured topics like the narrative pf the holocaust. I dont haye you for beimg passionate about it but i want people to have passion for real issues of today, like the death of imminent death of the oceans, and the black hole that is the middle east. The fact that i started this thread and got this much hate is really telling.

Again, sorry for misreading your post and drew this reply out because i have to go take a test, and if youve already replied and left im sorry

>if your a stormfag, go fuck yourself

The US do that on a daily basis though. I think it's called collateral damage. Don't get me wrong, I take the holocaust as a fact.

Collateral damage is entirely different issue, though. We are talking about "linear" damage.

>I generally don't believe

What you believe is of no importance when we have mountains of evidence for deliberate extermination of Jews, Poles, gypsies, gays, the disabled, ect.

Did the U.S have squads of men going around behind the lines executing people and dumping them into mass graves?

Why is illegal to ask for evidence of the holocaust?
No red polled shit please...

Post it pls

The same reason why is it illegal to ask why do you have only two hands.

holocaust threads need to be deleted on sight, its a filthy nucleation point for stormfags

It isn't.

>You see guys because retards call people nazis and fascists we should just never talk about it
What a pretentious load of shit
It isn't? People will be more than happy to direct you to relevant resources, now if you and host a conference sponsored by known neo-nazis and start saying it never happened is where you get into trouble

But it's not illegal to ask for evidence of the Holocaust. In certain countries it is illegal to deny the Holocaust and other genocides.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squad#United_States
huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/us-colombia-cover-up-atro_b_521402.html
Certainly looks like it.

Most of those laws were set up generations after WWII. You had a whole bunch of people for which it was all ancient history and among them was (maybe there's still is) a growing disbelief about the Holocaust. Thus laws were put in place to prevent denial of crime against humanity (the vast majority of those laws doesn't talk only about the holocaust, like stormfag would have you believe).

This is, I believe, part of the 1st world trying to put in place globalized laws. The very notion of "crime against humanity" means that you have done something objectively evil, that no moral culture can justify.

holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.pt/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html

That's only for Auschwitz. Other evidence exists for other crimes.

Of course.
There is zero verifiable evidence of any planning of the holocaust.
The only plans that were approved were things like the Madagascar plan (which Hitler himself signed), which was going to see Jews sent to Madagascar.

Also, the infrastructure used in the holocaust (Auschwitz etc.) in no way permits anything like the numbers presented.
Then there's the obvious fakery (chimney added post-war at Auschwitz, certain camps being presented as extermination camps at first but then changed to simply holding camps, number of deaths at Auschwitz adjusted from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1989 while the total number of 6 million remains in place, etc.)

The explanation is simple: Jews were being rounded up into camps for eventual removal out of Europe, but soon the Germans started losing and the inmates suffered greatly as a non-priority in a time of scarcity for the entire Nazi state.

...

Hoess

How old were the survivors running around today during the holocaust?

>starts killing since 1939 putting civilians before firing squads
>dude it's just because allies bombed supply lines lmao

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squad#United_States
Did you even read this? It's literally talking about the klan and grant fucking them up.

The Madagascar plan was abandoned. There's a reason it's called the FINAL solution.

>Also, the infrastructure used in the holocaust (Auschwitz etc.) in no way permits anything like the numbers presented.
Utter BS

>chimney added post-war at Auschwitz
It's a reconstruction, not a fakery.

>number of deaths at Auschwitz adjusted from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1989 while the total number of 6 million remains in place, etc.)
This number originated from the Soviet State Commission a few months after the camp was liberated. The Auschwitz State Museum, founded in 1947, made the mistake of putting the number on a memorial plaque before a more accurate figure could be established. They never got around to changing it until 1986, after the museum funded a study into the most accurate death toll to date using their historical archives. No historian takes these numbers you speak of seriously.

Mostly teenagers and young adults