Can anyone please explain me the logic why someone intending to kill a whole population evacuates that population from the danger of approaching war, sparing the most seriously ill, letting them the choice in order to avoid death by exhaustion? Wouldn't a killer chase the most seriously ill out of their beds first and bring all others CLOSER to the war zone in order to INCREASE the likelihood of being killed? Isn't that what makes a killer a killer?
It seems you missed the part about Primo Levi
avoiding evacuation.
Look, in January 1945 the Nazi frontline in Poland collapsed because of a Soviet offensive. There were 67,000 prisoners in the Auschwitz complex, a reduced number from the highpoint in the summer since so many able-bodied prisoners had been shipped out to other camps. The factories working in the Auschwitz complex were still trying to produce things. The Nazis did not stop all work until the very last minute, because that would be a little too defeatist - the frontline was meant to hold.
So, when the order came to evacuate the camp, it came very late. The SS had to leave in a hurry, but took 60,000 prisoners with them. 7,000 were left behind
before the SS had a chance to kill them.
Thus, what you're asking about is a question of expediency and contingency: however much the SS might have liked to have killed
all the useless prisoners, their fear of the Soviets overrode your 'logic' completely.
One other thing: the crap you have read on denier sites about prisoners being given a choice is completely untrue. The SS
ordered the prisoners out, succeeding in evacuating 89% of the inmates.
And once the SS started marching the prisoners to railheads, they started shooting prisoners who were too weak to march on, or who fell out on the way. That is why they're known as death marches.
The survivors of many of these marches, especially if unlucky enough to have to walk for days or even weeks, were often exhausted, and on arrival at a camp in Germany, were often too weak to work. That meant that they were often dumped into 'dying off camps' or zones in other KZs. Some were even gassed at Ravensbrueck and Mauthausen, where local SS authorities decided on their own initiative to use this tried and tested method. Other camps didn't have gas chambers, so simply let prisoners starve to death. That led to Belsen.
One last thing: Himmler suspended the formal Final Solution in November 1944. Part of that was him looking to the future and to create bargaining chips (however delusory) for negotiations with the Allies, part of that was a sense of having done as much of the job as was possible under the circumstances. So your question rests on a flawed premise, which is that the Nazis had one consistent policy that ran all the way up to May 8, 1945. They did not, and expecting them to have is completely un-historical.
