Who said a genocide didn't happen? Sorry my brain works and I can think critically. Or you also blindly believe what government and 24yr old history teachers tell you?
Also if you're obsessed with genocide, why wouldn't you just do what the Turks did and kill them where they stand? Instead of putting them into camps where you feed them and provide them medical care?
A genocide certainly happened, but I don't believe they were poured en mass into chambers full of gas, or ushed onto electrical floors and dipped in water. Or put in cages with bears and crows. We'll never know what actually happened because history is written by the winners. Had it gone the other way, Hitler would be telling us about how America put the Japanese into concentration camps. Oh no sorry, 'internment camps', because those are different.
Also if you're obsessed with genocide, why wouldn't you just do what the Turks did and kill them where they stand?
They did.
They committed plenty of massacres on the initial invasion. However, the systemic and complete execution of Jews (and other possible enemies) required significant effort. This meant that you had entire military units that were shooting people in mass executions. However, this is a significant use of both manpower and resources. Worse, even among hardened ideological zealot Nazis, there was significant mental exhaustion in personally having shot hundreds or thousands of people in short amounts of time. The work was too strenuous and it caused significant disruption and even a rare refusal to continue.
The needed dead was too low, and the resource and labor needs were too high, so they moved to gas trucks. This only slightly improved the situation. They National Socialists were now saving on bullets, but not on labor, and only slightly on stress. They also needed vast amounts of fuel and movement, and there was significant risk that knowledge of an extermination campaign would hurt their ability to subdue the region over all.
Ghettoizing populations, moving them by rail, depositing them into work camps to support the work effort, or extermination camps if it was not necessary to exploit the work, is the critical point of the holocaust: it is an industrialized system. The National Socialists made what economists call "capital investments" in committing mass murder.
Instead of putting them into camps where you feed them and provide them medical care?
For food: because you have to kill people in an orderly fashion, otherwise you get revolts. For medical care: check the sources. Medical care was segregated based on race. Jews rarely got any.
Had it gone the other way, Hitler would be telling us about how America put the Japanese into concentration camps. Oh no sorry, 'internment camps', because those are different.
Pretty different. I don't know of even rudimentary starvation of Japanese Americans in the Internment Camps, and there was no campaign of total extermination of Japanese Americans on the entire continent.
Pretty different. I don't know of even rudimentary starvation of Japanese Americans in the Internment Camps, and there was no campaign of total extermination of Japanese Americans on the entire continent.
WEELLLL, in the interest of absolute fairness (which is MUCH more than your typical Stormfag deserves), there are indeed confirmed cases of abuse in the internment camps and some cases of minor starvation. But your point still remains, it was very much the exception and not the rule.
And more importantly, we still trusted Japanese-Americans enough to give them guns and go fight our enemies. And their unit proved that apparently the desire to wipe out a katana, scream "BANZAI!!" and charge a machine gun is apparently inherent in the Japanese, because the 442nd is both the most decorated and most damaged US unit in the war.
But I imagine you would have a hard time finding Jews wielding weapons for the Nazi's. Because the second you gave them the guns, they would turn around and start trying to shoot said Nazi's with no real thought to whether or not they would be walking out alive. Because dragging a few Nazi's to hell with them would be preferable.
there are indeed confirmed cases of abuse in the internment camps and some cases of minor starvation.
If you put a group of people in an incarceration camp even under good conditions, you should always expect abuse, but yeah, it's not to the level of "if we feed the rescued prisoners 1,000 calories a day, we will kill them".
But I imagine you would have a hard time finding Jews wielding weapons for the Nazi's.
There were, occasionally, instances of Jewish Generals serving in the Army, but I think for the most part it was because their identity was kept relatively hidden anyway. They didn't have Jewish regiments.
Who said a genocide didn't happen? Sorry my brain works and I can think critically. Or you also blindly believe what government and 24yr old history teachers tell you? Also if you're obsessed with genocide, why wouldn't you just do what the Turks did and kill them where they stand? Instead of putting them into camps where you feed them and provide them medical care?
A genocide certainly happened, but I don't believe they were poured en mass into chambers full of gas, or ushed onto electrical floors and dipped in water. Or put in cages with bears and crows. We'll never know what actually happened because history is written by the winners. Had it gone the other way, Hitler would be telling us about how America put the Japanese into concentration camps. Oh no sorry, 'internment camps', because those are different.
They did.
They committed plenty of massacres on the initial invasion. However, the systemic and complete execution of Jews (and other possible enemies) required significant effort. This meant that you had entire military units that were shooting people in mass executions. However, this is a significant use of both manpower and resources. Worse, even among hardened ideological zealot Nazis, there was significant mental exhaustion in personally having shot hundreds or thousands of people in short amounts of time. The work was too strenuous and it caused significant disruption and even a rare refusal to continue.
The needed dead was too low, and the resource and labor needs were too high, so they moved to gas trucks. This only slightly improved the situation. They National Socialists were now saving on bullets, but not on labor, and only slightly on stress. They also needed vast amounts of fuel and movement, and there was significant risk that knowledge of an extermination campaign would hurt their ability to subdue the region over all.
Ghettoizing populations, moving them by rail, depositing them into work camps to support the work effort, or extermination camps if it was not necessary to exploit the work, is the critical point of the holocaust: it is an industrialized system. The National Socialists made what economists call "capital investments" in committing mass murder.
For food: because you have to kill people in an orderly fashion, otherwise you get revolts. For medical care: check the sources. Medical care was segregated based on race. Jews rarely got any.
Pretty different. I don't know of even rudimentary starvation of Japanese Americans in the Internment Camps, and there was no campaign of total extermination of Japanese Americans on the entire continent.
WEELLLL, in the interest of absolute fairness (which is MUCH more than your typical Stormfag deserves), there are indeed confirmed cases of abuse in the internment camps and some cases of minor starvation. But your point still remains, it was very much the exception and not the rule.
And more importantly, we still trusted Japanese-Americans enough to give them guns and go fight our enemies. And their unit proved that apparently the desire to wipe out a katana, scream "BANZAI!!" and charge a machine gun is apparently inherent in the Japanese, because the 442nd is both the most decorated and most damaged US unit in the war.
But I imagine you would have a hard time finding Jews wielding weapons for the Nazi's. Because the second you gave them the guns, they would turn around and start trying to shoot said Nazi's with no real thought to whether or not they would be walking out alive. Because dragging a few Nazi's to hell with them would be preferable.
If you put a group of people in an incarceration camp even under good conditions, you should always expect abuse, but yeah, it's not to the level of "if we feed the rescued prisoners 1,000 calories a day, we will kill them".
There were, occasionally, instances of Jewish Generals serving in the Army, but I think for the most part it was because their identity was kept relatively hidden anyway. They didn't have Jewish regiments.