[R_G]

An interesting topic, not to say the Jewish people didn't get trampled on for centuries before this, but the Holocaust really did change a lot.

Would Israel have gotten a foothold in British owned Palestine?

How about Nazis and evil? Would Hitler just be seen as another Napoleon?

I just saw the 1994 HBO film, Fatherland, it's on youtube in 11, 10 min parts.

It's not that well made, but it is a tv movie, anyway, it brings up some questions as to how the Holocaust defines a war and a generation.

Without it, the Nazis could have even won the war, I stress could, it is fair to consider that maintaining death camps and actually killing and disposing of roughly 6 million people will cost you a hell of a lot, financially. Not to mention the transport fees, etc.

So, discuss.

I seriously think this topic is very interesting, I'd like someone to give some financial statistics on how much the whole project cost.

In hindsight it was a waste of money for the Nazis, not to mention soldiers.

It also seems idiotic to just kill people instead of using them for labor.

[Erebus]

How about Nazis and evil? Would Hitler just be seen as another Napoleon?

Well, you never know if Hitler would have thought of something else, as cruel as the Holocaust, so I think not "just another Naopoleon", definitely worse.

[Donna]

Would Israel have gotten a foothold in British owned Palestine?

Yes. I really don't understand why people believe that the creation of Israel was some kind of result of the Holocaust. People seem to forget the history of aliyah dating back to the late 19th century. They seem to forget the Balfour Declaration. They seem to forget the fact that the British Mandate of Palestine was dated to expire. etc.

How about Nazis and evil? Would Hitler just be seen as another Napoleon?

Most likely. And he probably will eventually hold a place among the other adventurer-conquerers of history when enough time lapses.

I just saw the 1994 HBO film, Fatherland, it's on youtube in 11, 10 min parts.

That movie sucked.

[Thunderhawk]

Without The Holocaust

Just the killing of the Jews, or all the intentional massacres of civilians?

and actually killing and disposing of roughly 6 million people will cost you a hell of a lot, financially. Not to mention the transport fees, etc.

The state got to sieze most of those people's property which offsets some of the cost and gives the state a large amount of nice property to use as bribes and warnings to other groups.

I suspect the German state didnt loose too much financially, but they did loose a great deal of manpower - potential labour and services power killed and military power killed/diverted.

How about Nazis and evil? Would Hitler just be seen as another Napoleon?

To the best of my knowledge, Napoleon didnt try to ethnically clense intelligencia of peoples he didnt like, nor did he try to enslave the conquered as second/third/lower class citizens.

Most likely. And he probably will eventually hold a place among the other adventurer-conquerers of history when enough time lapses.

With Ghengis Khan, yes.

With Napoleon, it will take much more time.

[peter_co]

Without it, the Nazis could have even won the war, I stress could, it is fair to consider that maintaining death camps and actually killing and disposing of roughly 6 million people will cost you a hell of a lot, financially. Not to mention the transport fees, etc.

Not to imagine that the Jews represented one of the most highly educated sectors of German society and could have made an immense contribution to the German effort. Instead, due to the idiotic Anti-Semitic Policies of the Reich, many managed to escape and used their expertise to help Germany's enemies.

[R_G]

The state got to sieze most of those people's property which offsets some of the cost and gives the state a large amount of nice property to use as bribes and warnings to other groups.

I suspect the German state didnt loose too much financially, but they did loose a great deal of manpower - potential labour and services power killed and military power killed/diverted.

I think this argument is moot, the Nazi regime could have ordered banks to seize assets and basically rob the wealthy Jews, that's what the Bolsehviks did right?

So even if the Nazis did " balance " their budget, they probably made no actualy PROFIT in the war effort. Again, loss of man power too.

The reasoning for the Holocaust has always baffled me, it's so inefficient, the only mass killings that can be argued are political enemies, and even then if you have too many it's not worth it.

To the best of my knowledge, Napoleon didnt try to ethnically clense intelligencia of peoples he didnt like, nor did he try to enslave the conquered as second/third/lower class citizens.

Again, I said IF the Holocaust didn't happen, okay, then there would be no ethnic cleansing, get it? Napoleon did have many of political enemies killed, and he did conquer lands and proclaimed them part of the French Empire....

Not to imagine that the Jews represented one of the most highly educated sectors of German society and could have made an immense contribution to the German effort. Instead, due to the idiotic Anti-Semitic Policies of the Reich, many managed to escape and used their expertise to help Germany's enemies.

Agreed. It can be argued the Nazi regime destroyed itself from within much the same as Gorbachev destroyed the Soviet Union.

[Douglas]

it is fair to consider that maintaining death camps and actually killing and disposing of roughly 6 million people will cost you a hell of a lot, financially. Not to mention the transport fees, etc.

The Germans at the time weren't really all that concerned with economic policy when they were busy fighting in Stalingrad, it was more of a to do list thing. It would have only had any impact after the war, they weren't exactly short of money. War time economies never lack money. It's one of the few times you can actually control inflation and so can litlerally print money.

And he probably will eventually hold a place among the other adventurer-conquerers of history when enough time lapses.

Adventurer? He wasn't Indiana Jones, and he ain't gonna be remembered for much more than being just a bit of murderous dick.

[Thunderhawk]

So even if the Nazis did " balance " their budget, they probably made no actualy PROFIT in the war effort.

I did not say it was profitable, I said it offset the financial cost. I doubt they broke even, but financially it wasnt too costly, and it was usefull politically.

The reasoning for the Holocaust has always baffled me, it's so inefficient, the only mass killings that can be argued are political enemies, and even then if you have too many it's not worth it.

I concur. Better to reeducate and assimilate. Or, at the very least, use for menial labour.

Again, I said IF the Holocaust didn't happen, okay, then there would be no ethnic cleansing, get it?

You never clarified what was the holocaust.
In the West the holocaust is generally consider the killing of 6 million Jews. The other 5 million in the death camps and the millions of civilians killed in the field are usually considered seperate from the holocaust, if remembered at all.

[R_G]

I did not say it was profitable, I said it offset the financial cost. I doubt they broke even, but financially it wasnt too costly, and it was usefull politically.

How was it useful politically?

Not to mention I'm sure the Germans could have used the Jews in separate military units against the Commies considering Stalin was also an Anti-Semite.

I mean, theoretically speaking, they could have been used as cheap man waves at the least right?

Like the Soviets had convicts in separate military units.

You never clarified what was the holocaust.
In the West the holocaust is generally consider the killing of 6 million Jews. The other 5 million in the death camps and the millions of civilians killed in the field are usually considered seperate from the holocaust, if remembered at all.

Gypsies were castrated. Many of the captured POWs, most of them Eastern Europeans were given a chance to fight with the Nazis against the Soviets, many refuse. Five million is a large number, I'm not sure where you're getting it from, collectively speaking there couldn't have been more than 2 Million or so and even that's a stretch.

[Smilin' Dave]

Stalin was also an Anti-Semite.

Stalin also formed the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee during WWII. Given that removing the Holocaust doesn't necessarily remove Nazi anti-semitism, I don't see why Jews would fight for one anti-semite over another, expecially if one could point to a marginally better track record.

Gypsies were castrated. Many of the captured POWs, most of them Eastern Europeans were given a chance to fight with the Nazis against the Soviets, many refuse. Five million is a large number, I'm not sure where you're getting it from, collectively speaking there couldn't have been more than 2 Million or so and even that's a stretch.

Approximately 3 million Soviet POWs were killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crime ... oviet_POWs

Extermination (note, not just sterilisation) of Gypsy peoples is estimated to have resulted in between 200,000 to 1.5 million dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porajmos#Extermination

Approximately 2.5 million ethnic (non-Jewish) Poles killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crime ... hnic_Poles

Deaths of homosexuals is estimated between 5,000 and 15,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... tion_camps

Jehovah's Witnesses, approx 1,500.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutio ... tion_camps

Thus five million isn't that far fetched at all. I recommed you do some basic reading before you post such claims again.

[R_G]

Stalin also formed the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee during WWII. Given that removing the Holocaust doesn't necessarily remove Nazi anti-semitism, I don't see why Jews would fight for one anti-semite over another, expecially if one could point to a marginally better track record.

Russia kicked out many Jews quite forcibly in the early 1900s.....

As far as gypsy killings, I read a book titled Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies, not written by a German...

And 1.5 Million is an EXTREME overstatement, there's no indication of any number close to that in reality, sorry.

Captures Soviets killed by Nazis is justifiable.

Sorry, but if you conquer a territory and capture soldiers that were firing at your men, you can choose to kill them all and rightfully so.

[Smilin' Dave]

Ah, we've gone from denying the numbers to legitimising it I see.

Russia kicked out many Jews quite forcibly in the early 1900s.

I know. How many did the Nazis deport before they escalated to the full Holocaust?

As far as gypsy killings, I read a book titled Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies, not written by a German.

You read a book?

And 1.5 Million is an EXTREME overstatement, there's no indication of any number close to that in reality, sorry.

Prove the numbers wrong. I would actually be more inclined to believe the higher numbers given that it was much harder to account for the Roma and Sinti after the war, due to poor record keeping for these groups pre-war.

Captures Soviets killed by Nazis is justifiable.

Not when there wasn't a similar policy employed against POWs from other nations.

Sorry, but if you conquer a territory and capture soldiers that were firing at your men, you can choose to kill them all and rightfully so.

Doesn't cover the majority of Poles killed, let alone Jehovahs Witnesses or homosexuals.

[Dempsey]

Russian_Guy

How do you see the Great Patriotic War? Do ou think it was foolish of the part of the Russian to resist Germany?

[The Antiist]

I personally think describing the Holocaust as 'inefficient' is really insensitive and perverse perhaps even, but if you really want to look at it that scientifically I could try.

First off, I think it would've been much harder for Israel to get a UN resolution for it, but the British had been promising it anyway before WWII. Even if Israel would come into existence there would've been far less Jewish people willing to join the diaspora in my view and it would've made the Israeli nation far less strong.

Secondly, Hitler would still be seen as 'evil' since he did persecute all kinds of people besides the Jewish. Remember that 40-50% of the Holocaust victims were non-Jewish. Also, Hitler didn't just kill them off in isolated camps, he also put them in ghetto's and isolated them from society and all sorts of other terrible things.

Captures Soviets killed by Nazis is justifiable.

Sorry, but if you conquer a territory and capture soldiers that were firing at your men, you can choose to kill them all and rightfully so.

Rightful, except for the fact that its illegal and utterly immoral.

[R_G]

I personally think describing the Holocaust as 'inefficient' is really insensitive and perverse perhaps even, but if you really want to look at it that scientifically I could try.

First off, I think it would've been much harder for Israel to get a UN resolution for it, but the British had been promising it anyway before WWII. Even if Israel would come into existence there would've been far less Jewish people willing to join the diaspora in my view and it would've made the Israeli nation far less strong.

Secondly, Hitler would still be seen as 'evil' since he did persecute all kinds of people besides the Jewish. Remember that 40-50% of the Holocaust victims were non-Jewish. Also, Hitler didn't just kill them off in isolated camps, he also put them in ghetto's and isolated them from society and all sorts of other terrible things.

Looking at history as a tragedy here and there quickly becomes annoying, it's history, we can only analyze it, and remember, but we can't mourn forever.

That said, if there was no Holocaust I would assume there would not have been as many non-Jews killed either, you have to look at it as a domino effect, the Holocaust, not just against the Jews, but the whole project of mass killings was a whole other part of Nazi platform, so I suppose in essense I'm asking what if the Nazis didn't have this plainly idiotic policy? What if they just did what many dictatorships did against races held in dislike, keep them from achieving high class and exploit them every way possible, that's what the U.S. government did to the blacks for years.

This is not a topic of whether or not that's moral thinking, this is a topic on what if the Holocaust, and with it most mass killings initiated by the Nazis were not undertaken.

How do you see the Great Patriotic War? Do ou think it was foolish of the part of the Russian to resist Germany?

Off topic, but for the record I don't call it that, I call it, Stalin was a paranoid senile old fool who cost millions of Russians their lives, if you study Stalin and his purges, you'll know part of the reason the Nazis were so successful in Operation Barbarossa at the start was how weakened the country was after 15 years of Stalinist rule.

I know. How many did the Nazis deport before they escalated to the full Holocaust?

I honestly think the Jews of Europe would rather fight against Russians than Germans, I really do. At that point in time.

Prove the numbers wrong. I would actually be more inclined to believe the higher numbers given that it was much harder to account for the Roma and Sinti after the war, due to poor record keeping for these groups pre-war.

Prove em right, this game goes nowhere. Not to mention gypsies are more of a lifestyle than ethnic group....

Not when there wasn't a similar policy employed against POWs from other nations.

It's called getting ahead, and the Brits had POWs killed many a time in their wars.

Doesn't cover the majority of Poles killed, let alone Jehovahs Witnesses or homosexuals.

I'm sorry, 15,000 Jehowahs Witnesses from how many millions died in WWII?

Yeah......

[Dempsey]

Demp wrote:
How do you see the Great Patriotic War? Do ou think it was foolish of the part of the Russian to resist Germany?


Off topic, but for the record I don't call it that, I call it, Stalin was a paranoid senile old fool who cost millions of Russians their lives, if you study Stalin and his purges, you'll know part of the reason the Nazis were so successful in Operation Barbarossa at the start was how weakened the country was after 15 years of Stalinist rule.

But than how do you see the Russian heroic resistance? They didn't put such resistance for Uncle Joe alone, did they? They did it for mother Russia

I honestly think the Jews of Europe would rather fight against Russians than Germans, I really do. At that point in time.

Than you don't know how popular was Russia amongst the Jews. And rightly so. Much of the survivor Jews of the Nazi onslaught on Eastern Europe (mainly Poland) in 1939 was due of the fact that Stalin order to allow the enter of the escaping Jews into Russia and they also allowed to settle in Uzbekistan.

You also forget that "anti Semitic" Stalin was prime responsible for the UN to adpot its resolution establishing Israel (Palestine partition - 29 Nov 1947). Britain refused to recognise or even support the establishment of Israel because they feared it will add to Russian sphere one more ally.

Israel could not survive the Arab states attack (Palestine war - 1947-1949) without the weapon ordered by Stalin (supplied by Czechoslovakia). Not a single day.

[R_G]

Than you don't know how popular was Russia amongst the Jews. And rightly so. Much of the survivor Jews of the Nazi onslaught on Eastern Europe (mainly Poland) in 1939 was due of the fact that Stalin order to allow the enter of the escaping Jews into Russia and they also allowed to settle in Uzbekistan.

You also forget that "anti Semitic" Stalin was prime responsible for the UN to adpot its resolution establishing Israel (Palestine partition - 29 Nov 1947). Britain refused to recognise or even support the establishment of Israel because they feared it will add to Russian sphere one more ally.

Israel could not survive the Arab states attack (Palestine war - 1947-1949) without the weapon ordered by Stalin (supplied by Czechoslovakia). Not a single day.

This is all AFTER the war.

Russia wasn't a kind place for Jews beforehand.

And are you completely forgetting Truman's aid to Israel???

[Dempsey]

No, not only after the war!! The Jews adored the Russian revolution!

Truman's aid was no more than token support. Ok the Americans voted YES in that resolution and that's all. After that the Americans put weapon embargo on Israel. How could Israel stopped 5 Arab armies (trained and supplied by Britain) without the Soviet-sanctioned weapon?

[Dempsey]

Russian_Guy

Here is a very informative clip on American game on Israel establishment question.

[Smilin' Dave]

I honestly think the Jews of Europe would rather fight against Russians than Germans, I really do. At that point in time.

Given the facts are against you, I couldn't give a fuck what you think.

Prove em right, this game goes nowhere.

The links provided cite academic sources. You reference nothing, but dispute the numbers. So prove them wrong, its standard procedure.

Not to mention gypsies are more of a lifestyle than ethnic group

Yes, right, the Roma and Sinti are just made up. Surely this won't be yet another one of those topics you haven't got a clue about?

It's called getting ahead

Why not get ahead of the British and U.S troops then?

and the Brits had POWs killed many a time in their wars.

I'm sure they did, but on this scale? And in what manner?

I'm sorry, 15,000 Jehowahs Witnesses from how many millions died in WWII?

Yeah.

What about the 2.5 million ethnic Poles dead? They are mentioned right there in the text you quoted, why ignore them. What precisely did the Witnesses do to deserve their fate anyway Russian Guy?