Why Wasn't Auschwitz Bombed?

MaGZ said:
Jews were placed in concentration camps in Europe by the German government for exactly the same reasons Japanese, Germans and Italians were placed in American concentration camps in the western US: they were considered to be security risks to the government at a time of war.

Jews died in the camps due to disease and starvation. The Final Solution for the Jews was resettlement to the east after the victory of the Third Reich.

There was never a plan for genocide or extermination of Jews or anyone else.
Click to expand...

That is sickening BS.

What were the death squads for if not to help with the plan for extermination?
 
MaGZ said:
Jews were placed in concentration camps in Europe by the German government for exactly the same reasons Japanese, Germans and Italians were placed in American concentration camps in the western US: they were considered to be security risks to the government at a time of war.
Click to expand...
I presume then the question posed by the OP is of no consequence to you?


To return to ancillary matters for a moment...

gumboot said:
Primarily air attack - as I said the British destroyers were found to be highly vulnerable to air attack.
Click to expand...
Is there any particular reason for this vulnerability? Destroyers, at least in the Pacific, were small, fast, maneuverable targets that were hard to hit in dive bombing attacks (strikes by twin-engined bombers converted into strafers and using skip bombing and rockets are a different matter).

gumboot said:
And as you say, the major difference at Juno was what happened beyond the beach front. (I'm not sure it was entirely geography - another factor at Omaha was they were facing the best German unit on the entire line).
Click to expand...
It likely helped at Juno that many of the DD tanks made it ashore. At Omaha, the DD tanks were launched from too far out and nearly all of them foundered in the Channel (if I recall the figures correctly, only 2 out of 29 DD tanks destined for Omaha made it ashore).
 
MaGZ:

You have joined the esteemed ranks of LastChild, Terral, and JHArrow.

Welcome to Ignore, you racist SOB.
 
MaGZ said:
Jews were placed in concentration camps in Europe by the German government for exactly the same reasons Japanese, Germans and Italians were placed in American concentration camps in the western US: they were considered to be security risks to the government at a time of war.

Jews died in the camps due to disease and starvation. The Final Solution for the Jews was resettlement to the east after the victory of the Third Reich.

There was never a plan for genocide or extermination of Jews or anyone else.
Click to expand...

Post # 226

I believe what the german people tell me and show me. They are very sorry for the crimes their people committed.

Were gays and lesbians and disabled people and gypsy's considered security risks?

You are a liar as well as a bigot.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Sadly, the French 1996 Synchronised Swimming team decided to drop their holocaust-themed display for the Atlanta Olympics, otherwise the connection would have been easier to establish.
Click to expand...

Bloody hell, I thought you were joking until I clicked the link! :eek:
 
Corsair 115 said:
Is there any particular reason for this vulnerability? Destroyers, at least in the Pacific, were small, fast, maneuverable targets that were hard to hit in dive bombing attacks (strikes by twin-engined bombers converted into strafers and using skip bombing and rockets are a different matter).
Click to expand...

I think there's a few factors. Firstly - the British destroyers had very poor air defenses at the beginning of the war - after the first couple of years they were all outfitted with boosted anti air defenses.

Secondly, the Germans bombers were typically low level bombers designed for supporting the army in a close air support role. As such they tended to be faster and smaller, flying at lower altitude. This meant they'd attack a destroyer from very low level.

Thirdly, these destroyers were attacked close to France rather than far out in the middle of the Pacific, thus aircraft would have come upon them more suddenly.

Lastly, the destroyers of the Pacific developed into giant AA batteries that put up withering defensive screens around the carriers. As such they were incredibly difficult to sink.

By the end of the war, for example, a typical Fletcher Class US Destroyer was armed with five twin Bofors 40mm guns and seven 20mm guns.



Corsair 115 said:
It likely helped at Juno that many of the DD tanks made it ashore. At Omaha, the DD tanks were launched from too far out and nearly all of them foundered in the Channel (if I recall the figures correctly, only 2 out of 29 DD tanks destined for Omaha made it ashore).
Click to expand...

True, that probably made quite a difference.
 
Actually I would be interested in peoples opinion of how the Home Fleet would have been deployed. Would it be a case of leaving nothing in the tank, and basically deploying everything that could float, regardless of the danger, knowing the destruction of the fleet was a fair trade of for the defeat of the invasion.

I know Navy moral was pretty high through that period, and they saw the actions off Dunkirk as up holding the traditions of the service that dated back to the days of the Armada
 
MG1962 said:
Actually I would be interested in peoples opinion of how the Home Fleet would have been deployed. Would it be a case of leaving nothing in the tank, and basically deploying everything that could float, regardless of the danger, knowing the destruction of the fleet was a fair trade of for the defeat of the invasion.
Click to expand...

My opinion is, that's about right. After spending WW1 being too careful about preserving overwhelming superiority to achieve all it should have, the RN found itself in WW2 mainly over-stretched and having to take major risks all the time to achieve its aims. Almost invariably it did so, and was willing to sustain serious casualties in doing so. Cunningham's remark about taking heavy losses in the evacuation of Crete - "It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" - seems a good enough expression of the attitude; the honour of the service invariably outweighed any concern over safety. I have no doubt that, had Sealion been attempted, the RN would have thrown in everything willingly to stop it, and equally no doubt that as a result Sealion would have failed.

Dave
 
MaGZ said:
If you are familiar with the book and its author then you can comment on its veracity.

Do you believe every book that supports the Holocaust claim?
Click to expand...

Here is a question I have asked Magz, A-Train, Kageki... Never got an answer. What about all the testimonies and documentation describing the Holocaust published by (for example) Poles, not to mention other victims. Roma, oh many many.

So Magz, do you hate Poles too?

And by the way what about the Bad Arolsen archives, now coming open? Many linear miles of fantasies composed by German bureaucrats? That's why they lost the war, I guess; they diverted too many resources, human and otherwise, to composing documentary fantasies that there was a Holocaust going on. Hey -- I think I just invented a conspiracy theory!! I am so proud.
 
Bad news for Holocaust deniers; I am a British soldier and have lived/served in Germany most of my 36 years (am in Germany now), and I have personally spoken to many ex-Nazi soldiers who were there and saw these things (some who actually still have the balls to man-up and admit they did these things knowingly and willingly and wouldn't change a thing). Are they lying? To what end? To make themselves look mad, bad and dangerous to know in their old age?

Holocaust deniers - give it up you stupid, jew-hating, worthless chunks of dog-toffee. You're not 'pushing the envelope', you're not wild-eyed loners out on the ragged edge fighting for the REAL truth that people are too frightened to discuss - you're actually just wankers.
 
Last edited:
A-Train said:
The railway lines to Auschwitz were presumably to ship in raw materials and ship out finished product.
Click to expand...

Then what were they shipping to Belzec, for instance? Certainly not "raw materials," according to an Order Police officer of Reserve Police Battalion 133 in Police Regiment 24.

"To: Commander of the Order Police in the district of Galicia, Lemberg
Subject: Jewish resettlement

... The Jews had been informed by the above-mentioned agencies and the Labor Office to gather at the collection point. ... Some 5,300 Jews were actually assembled there at the appointed time. With all the manpower of my company, I sealed the Jewish quarter and searched thoroughly, whereby some additional 600 Jews were hunted down. ... Each car of the transport was loaded with 100 Jews. The great heat prevailing that day made the entire action very difficult and greatly impeded the transport. After the regular nailing up and sealing of all cars, the transport got underway to Belzec at 9 p.m., with a guard of one officer and nine men. With the coming of deep darkness in the night, many Jews escaped by squeezing through the air holes after removing the barbed wire. While the guard was able to shoot many of them immediately, most of the escaping Jews were eliminated that night or the next day. ... The transport was delivered to Belzec without incident.

(talking of further "actions" in his command area) On Sept. 8, some 300 Jews--old and weak, ill, frail and no longer transportable--were executed. According to the order of Sept. 4, of which I was informed of on Sept. 6, concerning use of ammunition, 90 percent of all those executed were shot with carbines and rifles. Only in exceptional cases were pistols used.

(talking of another transport to Belzec with 8,205 Jews) The slow journey was time and again used by the strongest Jews to press themselves thorugh the holes they had forced open and to seek their safety in flight, because in jumping from the slow-moving train they were scarcely injured. ... Shortly beyond Lemberg the commando had already shot off the ammunition they had with them and also used a further 200 rounds they had received from army soldiers, so that for the rest of the journey they had to resort to stones while the train was moving and fixed bayonets when the train was stopped.

The ever greater panic spreading among the Jews due to the great heat, overloading of the train cars, and stink of the dead bodies--when unloading the train cars some 2,000 Jews were found dead in the train--made the transport almost unworkable. ... Because of the special circumstances described, the number of Jews who escaped from this transport cannot be specified. Nonetheless, it can be assumed that at least two-thirds of the escaping Jews were shot or rendered harmless in some other way. ...

Westermann
Reserve Lt. of the Schutzpolizie and Company Commander"

--from documentation admitted as evidence in the Landgericht Wuppertal trial, stored now in Yad Vashem Archives, cited in 'Ordinary Men: Reserve Polcie Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland' by Christopher Browning

I have more letters from Order Police officers commenting on the mechanics of transports and mass executions, but I really don't feel like transcribing them. Suffice to say, most English and German-language university libraries should have copies of Browning's seminal work, and comparable historical journals and publications.
 
Assuming the Germans wanted to eliminate all undesirables, (remember, it wasn't only Jews, they were a minority of the people that the Germans killed), and assuming the Germans were as smart as we are told they are, one wonders, if one happened to wander into this topic, why they didn't use the time tested and cheap method of killing vast populations of people.

That whole shipping by rail, gassing, then moving to the ovens thing, as well as building a big old camp, and all the expense that goes with it, seems terribly wasteful, especially in war time when resources are scarce.
 
robinson said:
Assuming the Germans wanted to eliminate all undesirables, (remember, it wasn't only Jews, they were a minority of the people that the Germans killed), and assuming the Germans were as smart as we are told they are, one wonders, if one happened to wander into this topic, why they didn't use the time tested and cheap method of killing vast populations of people.

That whole shipping by rail, gassing, then moving to the ovens thing, as well as building a big old camp, and all the expense that goes with it, seems terribly wasteful, especially in war time when resources are scarce.
Click to expand...
And the idiocy marches on.
 
robinson said:
Assuming the Germans wanted to eliminate all undesirables, (remember, it wasn't only Jews, they were a minority of the people that the Germans killed), and assuming the Germans were as smart as we are told they are, one wonders, if one happened to wander into this topic, why they didn't use the time tested and cheap method of killing vast populations of people.

That whole shipping by rail, gassing, then moving to the ovens thing, as well as building a big old camp, and all the expense that goes with it, seems terribly wasteful, especially in war time when resources are scarce.
Click to expand...

First up, the NAZI leadership was nowhere near as smart as many think they were. They also wanted to turn the idea into a production line system to aid in increasing the numbers killed.
 
I never doubted the Germans under Hitler killed all those people. I just wonder why they were so stupid about it. It seems obvious they, like the Soviets, were more interested in slave labor and working people to death than just killing them outright.

The Soviets killed 10 times as many people as the Germans, there own citizens. But they mostly worked them to death, except for the slaughter of whole villages.

I'm no expert on WWII, but didn't the Germans use the young and healthy people as slaves before they killed them?
 
robinson said:
Assuming the Germans wanted to eliminate all undesirables, (remember, it wasn't only Jews, they were a minority of the people that the Germans killed), and assuming the Germans were as smart as we are told they are, one wonders, if one happened to wander into this topic, why they didn't use the time tested and cheap method of killing vast populations of people.

That whole shipping by rail, gassing, then moving to the ovens thing, as well as building a big old camp, and all the expense that goes with it, seems terribly wasteful, especially in war time when resources are scarce.
Click to expand...

They did. EinsatzgruppenWP

In fact, it turned out to be much less efficient than the death camps. This is why the death camps came along much later in the war.
 
robinson said:
That whole shipping by rail, gassing, then moving to the ovens thing, as well as building a big old camp, and all the expense that goes with it, seems terribly wasteful, especially in war time when resources are scarce.
Click to expand...
The German leadership wasn't terribly bright. Hitler actually ordered a cut in fighter production after the Battle of Britain, for example. Germany's economy wasn't put on a total war footing until 1943, for another example.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom